ArticleForensic sciences research2020
An overview of forensic operations performed following the terrorist attacks on November 13, 2015, in Paris.
Article 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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of hemorrhage and vascular injuries in civilian public mass shootings.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Assault rifle injuries in civilians: ballistics of wound patterns, assessment and initial management.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024Review
- The outcome of the forensic triage preceding disaster victim identification in the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight 17.Forensic sciences research · 2022Article
- Forensic multidisciplinary involvement after terrorist attacks.Forensic sciences research · 2020Article
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 at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
On the evening of November 13, 2015, the city of Paris and its surroundings was hit by a series of attacks committed by terrorist groups, using firearms and explosives. The final toll was 140 people deceased (130 victims and 10 terrorists or their relatives) and more than 413 injured, making these attacks the worst mass killings ever recorded in Paris in peacetime. This article presents the forensic operations carried out at the Medicolegal Institute of Paris (MLIP) following these attacks. A total of 68 autopsies of bodies or body fragments and 83 external examinations were performed within 7 days, and the overall forensic operations (including formal identification of the latest victims) were completed 10 days after the attacks. Over this period, 156 body presentations (some bodies were presented several times) were provided to families or relatives. Regarding the 130 civilian casualties, 129 died from firearm wounds and one died from blast injuries after an explosion. Of the 10 terrorists or their relatives who were killed, eight died from suicide bombing, one was shot by police and one died from crush injuries due to partial collapse of a building following the police raid against a terrorist's hideout after the attacks. All mass shootings were perpetrated with AK-47 or Zastava M70 assault rifles using 7.62 mm × 39 mm cartridges. In the case of ballistic injuries, death was most often obviously caused by craniocerebral injuries, extensive organ lacerations and/or massive haemorrhage. Among the terrorists killed by bombing, the lesion patterns were body transection, multiple amputations, extreme organ lacerations and the presence of foreign bodies owing to the shrapnel load (steel nuts, glass fragments) or the explosive charge fastening system of the devices. This discussion highlights the particular difficulties of interpretation encountered within the framework of ballistic injuries, a conclusion that should lead to a modest and realistic approach in these exceptional situations where forensic operations involve a very large number of victims in a constrained time.
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.