ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Pathological Findings in Hanging: Is the Traditional Knowledge Correct?
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Combined machine learning identification and experimental validation of NDUFS8 and SUCLG1 as potential biomarkers for mechanical asphyxia.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Conventional and machine learning-based analysis of age, body weight and body height significance in knot position-related thyrohyoid and cervical spine fractures in suicidal hangings.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn forensic pathology, asphyxia presents a problem as frequently as it is thorny and challenging. Some knowledge in forensic pathology is still considered to be traditionally acquired and is not critically assessed with modern statistical or technical tools. In this study, we seek to examine the injuries that are considered to be typical of cases of hanging (neck lesions, haemorrhages, and pleural and epicardial petechiae).
methodsWe evaluated whether there was, indeed, a statistically significant association between these injuries and deaths from hanging as compared to non-hanging deaths. We collected 399 cases (32 deaths by hanging and 367 cases of non-hangings), built contingency tables and performed chi-square tests for each variable (lesion) examined; we also analysed this association in various subgroups of the sample (according to sex, age and weight ranges).
resultsOur results did not deviate from the expected outcome based on traditional knowledge, although they do provide a more detailed demonstration and clarification of traditional knowledge regarding this topic.
conclusionsThese findings provide valuable insights for future discussion, examination and deepening of knowledge that is traditionally accepted but often undersupported in the literature.
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.