ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2021
Translational Application of a Neuro-Scientific Multi-Modal Approach Into Forensic Psychiatric Evaluation: Why and How?
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cognitive profiles of paedophilic behaviour: a meta-analytic and systematic review of developmental vs acquired forms.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Sexual assault by a gynecologist with two frontal lobe meningiomas: implications and challenges for forensic psychiatric assessment: a case report.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Glioblastoma and new-onset criminal behaviors in a geriatric patient: a forensic-psychiatric case report from Switzerland.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Validation of a new instrument to guide and support insanity evaluations: the defendant's insanity assessment support scale (DIASS).Translational psychiatry · 2022Article
- Basic principles and new advances in kidney imaging.Kidney international · 2021Review
- Under-Interpretation of Neuroimaging Data in Insanity Assessment: A Hidden Risk.Behavioral sciences & the lawArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A prominent body of literature indicates that insanity evaluations, which are intended to provide influential expert reports for judges to reach a decision "
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.