ArticleAcademic forensic pathology2022
Medicolegal Aspects of Victims of Assault Admitted to a Tertiary Care Hospital in Sri Lanka.
Article in Academic forensic pathology, 2022. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Violence with physical assault is a common cause of morbidity and mortality prevalent but not limited to underdeveloped countries. The opinion of the forensic expert is often indispensable in such cases to determine the penalties. This study was planned to describe the pattern of presentation of the victims and evaluate the strengths and limitations in formulating a scientific medicolegal opinion based on the findings of the victim. Methods: A retrospective descriptive study based on the case records of the victims of assault admitted to Colombo North Teaching Hospital, Ragama, Sri Lanka, was conducted for four years. Results: Out of the 400 victims, the majority (72% n = 290) were males and of the age-group of 21 to 40 (n = 216). The reason for assault in the majority was sudden provocation (n = 99, 25%), followed by previous long-duration enmity (n = 89, 22%). The majority (83%) had isolated blunt force trauma, and the injuries were nongrievous (74%). Defense injuries were significantly associated with attempted defense (p = 0.000) and sharp force trauma (p = 0.002). The underlying reason for the assault was not significantly associated with the causative weapon (p = 0.228) or body region injured (p = 0.195). Conclusions: Even though the presentation and the pattern of injures are definitely of value in formulating a scientific opinion, the study identified the limitations of the forensic experts, and the need for a holistic approach at the investigations was highlighted.
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.