Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36799966›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2023

PMI estimation through metabolomics and potassium analysis on animal vitreous humour.

Emanuela Locci, Matteo Stocchero, Rossella Gottardo, Alberto Chighine, Fabio De-Giorgio, Giulio Ferino, Matteo Nioi, Roberto Demontis, Franco Tagliaro, Ernesto d'Aloja

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. PMI estimation throughMetabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. European radiology experimental · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Emanuela LocciDepartment of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Section of Legal Medicine, University of Cagliari, Cittadella Universitaria di Monserrato, 09042, Monserrato, Cagliari, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0237-4228
Matteo StoccheroDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, University of Padova, Padua, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9296-8390
Rossella GottardoDepartment of Diagnostics and Public Health, Unit of Forensic Medicine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5997-1723
Alberto ChighineDepartment of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Section of Legal Medicine, University of Cagliari, Cittadella Universitaria di Monserrato, 09042, Monserrato, Cagliari, Italy. alberto.chighine@unica.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0952-9712
Fabio De-GiorgioDepartment of Health Surveillance and Bioethics, Section of Legal Medicine, Catholic University of Rome, Rome, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7433-0924
Giulio FerinoDepartment of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Section of Legal Medicine, University of Cagliari, Cittadella Universitaria di Monserrato, 09042, Monserrato, Cagliari, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6349-6491
Matteo NioiDepartment of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Section of Legal Medicine, University of Cagliari, Cittadella Universitaria di Monserrato, 09042, Monserrato, Cagliari, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3645-6005
Roberto DemontisDepartment of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Section of Legal Medicine, University of Cagliari, Cittadella Universitaria di Monserrato, 09042, Monserrato, Cagliari, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2306-9767
Franco TagliaroDepartment of Diagnostics and Public Health, Unit of Forensic Medicine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2187-9128
Ernesto d'AlojaDepartment of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Section of Legal Medicine, University of Cagliari, Cittadella Universitaria di Monserrato, 09042, Monserrato, Cagliari, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4456-6252
University of Cagliari · ITUniversity of Verona · ITAgostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITUniversity of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe estimation of post-mortem interval (PMI) remains a major challenge in forensic science. Most of the proposed approaches lack the reliability required to meet the rigorous forensic standards.

objectivesWe applied

methodsVitreous humour samples were collected in a time frame ranging from 6 to 86 h after death. Experiments were performed by using

resultsA multivariate calibration model was built to estimate PMI based on 47 vitreous humour samples. The model was validated with an independent test set of 24 samples, obtaining a prediction error on the entire range of 6.9 h for PMI < 24 h, 7.4 h for PMI between 24 and 48 h, and 10.3 h for PMI > 48 h. Time-related modifications of the

conclusionThe present study, although in a proof-of-concept animal model, shows that vitreous metabolomics can be a powerful tool to predict PMI providing a more accurate estimation compared to the widely studied approach based on vitreous potassium concentrations.

Indexed as

Postmortem ChangesPotassiumAnimalsMetabolomicsReproducibility of ResultsSheepVitreous BodyPotassium1H NMR metabolomicsAnimal modelCIAPMIPotassium concentrationVitreous humour

Identifiers

PMID36799966
PMCPMC10085955
OpenAlexW4321168989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.