ArticleForensic science international. Synergy2021
Examination of date tampering on Abraham Lincoln's pardon of Patrick Murphy, RG 153 entry 15, case MM761 (ARC identifier: 1839980).
Article in Forensic science international. Synergy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
On January 26, 2011, the Pardon of Patrick Murphy, a document in the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) Record Group 153 (RG 153) Records of the Office of the Judge Advocate General (Army), was submitted to conservation for examination. The record was examined with special focus on the handwritten "1865" to the left of Abraham Lincoln's signature. All analysis techniques were non-sampling, non-invasive, and non-damaging as retaining the integrity of cultural heritage is very similar to the forensic handling of evidence. Microscopy, transmitted light, Ultraviolet-induced visible fluorescence, and X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) spectroscopy analysis confirmed that the ink used to write the "5", in the April 14, 1865 date is different from the remaining text written by Lincoln and these analytical forensic-inspired techniques allowed scientists and conservators to "set the record straight" about the modern forged "5" for future generations of researchers.
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.