ArticleForensic sciences research2024
Human identification through forensic skeletal analysis: three case reviews.
Article in Forensic sciences research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using computed tomography, photogrammetry & structured light scanning for measuring human mandibles: a comparison of metric analysis using various 3D imaging technologies.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Prediction of body weight and ethnicity using anthropomorphic measurements of the hand in two different populations.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Cranial Bone Repair and Regeneration After Trauma: Forensic and Clinical Medico-Legal Consequences.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Forensic identification in a multidisciplinary perspective focusing on big challenges.Forensic sciences research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Establishing a positive identification of human remains found in a forensic setting is often accomplished through DNA, fingerprints, or odontology. However, when these primary identifiers cannot be applied, practitioners can rely on combining points of concordance derived from other identification modalities such as antemortem trauma, pathology, or unique skeletal morphologies to build up a case for identification. In order to conduct these comparisons, forensic anthropologists must be well trained and experienced in human skeletal variation and antemortem trauma to properly evaluate a particular skeletal trait and understand its value with respect to personal identification. In addition to macroscopic analysis of skeletal features and standard radiographic images, recent forensic anthropological efforts of establishing personal identity from the skeleton have employed high-quality clinical imaging technologies. This article presents three forensic anthropological cases in which positive identification was established on the basis of multiple antemortem to postmortem comparison modalities that included skeletal variation, antemortem fracture morphologies, trabecular patterns, dental traits, and implanted surgical devices. These cases use a variety of imaging techniques, such as cranial radiographic images, dental radiographs, computed tomography, photography, and 3D surface scans of the skeletal remains, to achieve personal identification. Key points: The identification of the remains becomes a top priority in forensic investigations.Dental treatment, implanted surgical devices, anatomical variation, and healed skeletal trauma can provide useful features for the antemortem
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.