Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37843744›Full record

SynthesisForensic science, medicine, and pathology2024

Microbiology and postmortem interval: a systematic review.

Bruna Moitas, Inês Morais Caldas, Benedita Sampaio-Maia

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

3 authors.

Bruna MoitasDepartamento de Ciências da Saúde Pública e Forenses e Educação Médica, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Inês Morais CaldasFaculdade de Medicina Dentária da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal. icaldas@fmd.up.pt.ORCID 0000-0003-0706-3242
Benedita Sampaio-MaiaFaculdade de Medicina Dentária da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-9368-8075

Funding

Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino Superior (UIDB/04004/2020)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review aims to learn if and how it is possible to use the human microbiome to indicate the time elapsed after death. Articles were searched on the PubMed database using predefined data fields and keywords; reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses were excluded. The final selection included 14 papers (out of 144). The results indicated that the microorganisms present in the cadaveric island succeed predictably over time, with markers between the stages of decomposition constituting a potential innovative tool for postmortem interval (PMI) estimation. The human microbiome has the potential to be used for PMI estimation and may present advantages as microbes are present in all seasons, in all habitats, including the most extreme ones, and because microbial communities respond predictably to environmental changes.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaPostmortem ChangesHumansBacterial DNAForensic microbiologyMicrobiomeMicroorganismPostmortem interval

Identifiers

PMID37843744
PMCPMC11297127

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.