ArticleScientific reports2024
An exclusionary screening method based on 3D morphometric features to sort commingled atlases and axes.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- A robust forensic reasoning to estimate the minimum number of individuals: the certain exclusion.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In forensic commingled contexts, when the disarticulation occurs uniquely at the atlantoaxial joint, the correct match of atlas and axis may lead to the desirable assembly of the entire body. Notwithstanding the importance of this joint in such scenarios, no study has so far explored three-dimensional (3D) methodologies to match these two adjoining bones. In the present study, we investigated the potential of re-associating atlas and axis through 3D-3D superimposition by testing their articular surfaces congruency in terms of point-to-point distance (Root Mean Square, RMS). We analysed vertebrae either from the same individual (match) and from different individuals (mismatch). The RMS distance values were assessed for both groups (matches and mismatches) and a threshold value was determined to discriminate matches with a sensitivity of 100%. The atlas and the corresponding axis from 41 documented skeletons (18 males and 23 females), in addition to unpaired elements (the atlas or the axis) from 5 individuals, were superimposed, resulting in 41 matches and 1851 mismatches (joining and non-joining elements). No sex-related significant differences were found in matches and mismatches (p = 0.270 and p = 0.210, respectively), allowing to pool together the two sexes in each group. RMS values ranged between 0.41 to 0.77 mm for matches and between 0.37 and 2.18 mm for mismatches. Significant differences were found comparing the two groups (p < 0.001) and the highest RMS of matches (0.77 mm) was used as the discriminative value that provided a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 41%. In conclusion, the 3D-3D superimposition of the atlanto-axial articular facets cannot be considered as a re-association method per se, but rather as a screening one. However, further research on the validation of the 3D approach and on its application to other joints might provide clues to the complex topic of the reassociation of crucial adjoining bones.
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.