ReviewForensic sciences research2020
Research advances in forensic diatom testing.
Review in Forensic sciences research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tissue expression of aquaporin-5 and cytochrome c as potential forensic biomarkers of drowning: Evidence from an experimental rat model.Die Naturwissenschaften · 2026Article
- Diatom Analysis in Drowning: A Critical Review of Reliability, Contamination, and Medico-Legal Interpretation.Cureus · 2026Review
- A simple optical microscopy-based diatom classification approach for forensic drowning site inference: a pilot study.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Article
- Quantitative investigation of diatom dispersion in lung tissue of confirmed drowning incidents.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Article
- The diatom test in the field of forensic medicine: a review of a long-standing question.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Review
- Forensic Diatom Analysis: Where Do We Stand and What Are the Latest Diagnostic Advances?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Diatoms pass through the gastrointestinal barrier and lead to false-positive: an animal experiment.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2024Article
- Automatic detection and identification of diatoms in complex background for suspected drowning cases through object detection models.International journal of legal medicine · 2024Article
- A state-of-the-art survey of object detection techniques in microorganism image analysis: from classical methods to deep learning approaches.Artificial intelligence review · 2023Article
- Trends in forensic microbiology: From classical methods to deep learning.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- Concordance analysis of diatom types and patterns in lung tissue and drowning medium in laboratory animal model.International journal of legal medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- An improved automated diatom detection method based on YOLOv5 framework and its preliminary study for taxonomy recognition in the forensic diatom test.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Diatom-Positive Cadaver: Drowning or Homicide?Cureus · 2021Article
- An efficient method for building a database of diatom populations for drowning site inference using a deep learning algorithm.International journal of legal medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In forensic practice, it is difficult to determine whether a dead body in the water resulted from drowning or from disposal after death. Diatom testing is currently an important supporting technique for the determination of death by drowning and of drowning sites, even though it is a time-consuming and laborious task. This article reviews the development of diatom testing over the decades and discusses a new method for the potential application of deep learning in diatom testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.