ArticleThe Journal of forensic odonto-stomatology2020
Characterization of lip prints in a Portuguese twins' population.
Article in The Journal of forensic odonto-stomatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lip print patterns are referred to as unique to each individual, but controversy exists surrounding twins. In this study, the lip prints of 19 pairs of monozygotic and 47 pairs of dizygotic twins were studied. The left lower lip was photographed and the furrows were classified using Renaud's classification. Results showed the same lip pattern was found only in one monozygotic pair (5.3%) and in 4 dizygotic pairs (8.5%), and no significant statistical differences were found between groups (p > 0.05). In monozygotic twins only type C furrows presence displayed statistical significant differences (p=0.034). As for dizygotic twins, there were statistical significant differences in the frequency of type A (p=0.005) and type G furrows (p=0.018). As for the most common types, both groups displayed a higher prevalence of vertical furrows (type B: 97.4% and 96.8%, type A: 86.8% and 87.2%, in monozygotic and dizygotic, respectively). The least frequent furrow type was type I and type E in monozygotic (2.6% and 5.3%, respectively) and types E, F and I, in dizygotic (6.4%, 7.4%. and 7.4%, respectively). Our results seem to point out that lip print patterns should be useful carefully in twins' identification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33174536PMC8559899What 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.