ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2024
Spina bifida, the normal, the pathological and the in-between: first evidence from a forensic osteological collection.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spina bifida (SB), a rare congenital disorder, is often mentioned as an individualizing factor in Forensic Anthropology. A lack of empirical data regarding SB is noticed in the scientific literature. Moreover, within the scope of anthropological research on SB disparities in terminology, classification systems, and methodological approaches result in incomparable results. The wide range (1,2%-50%) of "spina bifida occulta" reported prevalences is a good example. This research aims to analyze and debate the standard diagnostic criteria of SB on human skeletal remains, and attempts to elaborate on an universal system, premised on the distinction between SB as a pathology, and cleft neural arch (CNA) as an anatomical variant, according to Barnes (1994, p. 360 [1). A study-base of 209 individuals (88 males; 121 females; 44-99 years old) from the 21st Century Identified Skeletal Collection from the University of Coimbra (CEI/XXI) was macroscopically analyzed, focusing on the sacrum and remaining vertebrae. Four individuals presented complete posterior opening of the sacral canal (2,6%[4/156]). The observed bone changes, combined with the analysis of the entire skeleton, indicate that CNA, rather than SB linked to a neural tube defect, is the most reliable explanation for these cases. Overall, CNA was observed on 11 skeletons (7.05% of 156). The viability and applicability of the developed methodology for the identification of SB/CNA in forensic and/or osteological contexts are discussed, as well as the possibility of a lower prevalence of SB occulta, in the general population, than speculated before. HIGHLIGHTS: • Spina bifida has been studied so far under different methodologies, classification systems and nomenclature, leading to unstandardized and incomparable data. • Spina bifida as a pathological manifestation of a neural tube defect, as opposed to cleft neural arch as a simple form of skeletal variation. • Both spina bifida and complete sacral cleft fit the criteria of an individualizing trait in Forensic Anthropology.
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.