Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35003452›Full record

ArticleAcademic forensic pathology2021

The "Magnificent Seven Errors" in Forensic Autopsy Practice: The Italian Context.

Roberto Scendoni, Piergiorgio Fedeli, Nunzia Cannovo, Mariano Cingolani

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Academic forensic pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Piergiorgio Fedeli
Nunzia Cannovo
Mariano Cingolani
University of Macerata · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

According to the Italian legal system, forensic autopsies are performed by a medical doctor specialized in legal medicine, otherwise known as a medicolegal expert (MLE), who has a range of very complex responsibilities. Indeed, the quality of forensic autopsy activity is always questioned in courts of law; incorrect assessments are dangerous because they can jeopardize the validity of a criminal investigation and thus affect the outcome so that a real culprit may be acquitted or an innocent person convicted. Nonconformities also discredit the professionalism of the specialist who performs the autopsy. The work of a MLE implies a series of assignments and duties that should be given constant consideration, but when certain aspects of this activity are underestimated or overlooked, this can lead the expert to make mistakes with irreparable consequences for the judicial investigation. In this article, for the first time, we present a summary of seven known errors related to autopsy activity following death by unnatural causes, with the purpose of alerting MLEs who work under the Italian judicial system to the potential dangers of such errors. These relate to: oversights in autopsy technique, incorrect collection of photographic and video material, unauthorized attendance at the autopsy, missing/mistaken reporting at any stage of the forensic activity, failure to notify the party forensic consultant, using histological or toxicological nonaccredited laboratories for forensic activities, and lack of observance of the chain of custody.

Indexed as

Chain of custodyForensic autopsyForensic pathologyHistological samplesMedicolegal errorsToxicological analyses

Identifiers

PMID35003452
PMCPMC8727839
OpenAlexW3212675541

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.