Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39150507›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2024

Post-mortem to ante-mortem facial image comparison for deceased migrant identification.

Caroline Wilkinson, Martina Pizzolato, Danilo De Angelis, Debora Mazzarelli, Annalisa D'Apuzzo, Jessica Ching Liu, Pasquale Poppa, Cristina Cattaneo

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

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. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Data After Death: Post-Mortem Ethics of Burn Patient Records and Images.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Caroline WilkinsonFace Lab, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK. c.m.wilkinson@ljmu.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4603-5554
Martina PizzolatoFace Lab, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.
Danilo De AngelisLABANOF, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Debora MazzarelliLABANOF, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Annalisa D'ApuzzoLABANOF, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Jessica Ching LiuFace Lab, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.
Pasquale PoppaLABANOF, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Cristina CattaneoLABANOF, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Funding

Liverpool John Moores University MPhil scholarship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The identification of deceased migrants is a global challenge that is exacerbated by migration distance, post-mortem conditions, access to ante-mortem data for comparison, inconsistent international procedures and lack of communication between arrival and origin countries. Due to low technology requirements, fast speed analysis and ease of transferring digital data, facial image comparison is particularly beneficial in those contexts, especially in challenging scenarios when this may be the only initial ante-mortem data available to identify the deceased. The Facial Identification Scientific Working Group (FISWG) professional guidelines for facial image comparison were developed for living facial appearance, and, therefore, a tailored protocol for the application of post-mortem to ante-mortem facial image comparison was proposed and evaluated in this research. The protocol was investigated via an inter-observer and an accuracy study, using 29 forensic cases (2001-2020) from the University of Milan, provided by the Laboratory of Forensic Anthropology and Odontology. In order to replicate a migrant identification scenario, each post-mortem subject was compared to all 29 ante-mortem targets (841 comparisons). The protocol guided the practitioner through stages of facial image comparison, from broad (phase 1) to more detailed (phase 3), eventually leading to a decision of 'exclusion' or 'potential match' for each post-mortem to ante-mortem case (phase 4). In phase 4, a support scale was also utilised to indicate the level of confidence in a potential match. Each post-mortem subject could be recorded with multiple potential matches. The protocol proved to be useful guide for facial image comparison, especially for less experienced practitioners and the inter-observer study suggested good reproducibility. The majority (82-96%) of ante-mortem subjects were excluded at the first stage of the protocol, and 71 full post-mortem to ante-mortem facial image comparisons were carried out. On average, two or three potential matches were recorded for each post-mortem subject. The overall accuracy rate was 85%, with the majority (79%) of ante-mortem non-targets correctly excluded from the identification process. An increased number and quality of available ante-mortem images produced more successful matches with higher levels of support. All potential matches involving non-targets received low levels of support, and for 73% of the post-mortem subjects, the ante-mortem target was the only recorded potential match. However, two ante-mortem targets were incorrectly excluded (one at the first stage of the protocol) and therefore changes to the protocol were implemented to mitigate these errors. A full protocol and a practical recording chart for practitioner use is included with this paper.

Indexed as

FaceBiometric IdentificationFemaleForensic AnthropologyHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleObserver VariationPhotographyTransients and MigrantsDisaster victim identificationFacial image comparisonMigrant

Identifiers

PMID39150507
PMCPMC11490436

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.