Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39462002›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Aboriginal Australian weapons and human efficiency.

Laura E Diamond, Michelle C Langley, Bradley Cornish, Claudio Pizzolato, David J Saxby

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 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. Biomechanical effects of sex and bat size on head-directed blunt strikes.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Laura E Diamond *Australian Centre for Precision Health and Technology (PRECISE), Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia. l.diamond@griffith.edu.au.
Michelle C Langley *Australian Research Centre for Human Evolution, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.
Bradley CornishAustralian Centre for Precision Health and Technology (PRECISE), Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia.
Claudio Pizzolato *Australian Centre for Precision Health and Technology (PRECISE), Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia.
David J Saxby *Australian Centre for Precision Health and Technology (PRECISE), Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia.

Funding

Australian Research Council 220101249National Health and Medical Research Council 2017012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aggression-and its role in human societal development-continues to be hotly debated within both the sciences and the humanities. Whatever the evolutionary origins and repercussions of interpersonal and intergroup conflict for the human story, cultures around the globe have invested significant time and effort into designing deadly hand-held weaponry. Here, we describe for the first time, how humans deliver a deadly strike using two iconic and widespread Aboriginal Australian weapons: the kodj and the leangle with parrying shield. We present the world's first evaluation of striking biomechanics and human and weapon efficiency regarding this class of implement. Results demonstrate the leangle is far more effective at delivering devastating blows to the human body, while the kodj-a multi-functional tool-is more efficient for a human to manoeuvre and still capable of delivering severe blows that can cause death. Together, these data provide the beginnings of an in-depth understanding of how hand-held weaponry has impacted the human body throughout the deep past.

Indexed as

WeaponsAggressionAustraliaAustralian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander PeoplesBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansAboriginal AustraliaBiomechanicsConflictExperimentationIndigenousKinematicsKinetic energy

Identifiers

PMID39462002
PMCPMC11513080

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.