ArticleForensic sciences research2024
Human identification by medical findings in a forensic anthropology context.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Non-metric traits of the cranium: are they related one with each other? A novel approach to skeletal variants.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Forensic skeletal and molecular anthropology face to face: Combining expertise for identification of human remains.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025Review
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article presents a series of three complex forensic cases that posed significant challenges for identifying human remains. These include a mass dam disaster, burnt human remains, and extensively decomposed human remains. Positive identification was achieved using a shadow positioning technique with imaging comparisons of medical findings. After establishing the biological profile, medical data were evaluated with digital radiography and computed tomography examinations the human remains. These aimed to replicate the original (intravitam) traits in the same angulation to examine postsurgical characteristics, as well as the anatomical, pathological, and morphological features, which were sufficient to establish a positive scientific identification. Technological advancements tend to reveal additional skeletal details, making medical data comparisons significantly more effective in the context of anthropological identification. These cases demonstrate that the possibility of identification should never be ignored, even in situations with advanced decomposition. Key points: Conventional identification methods may not always be applicable in forensic anthropology cases.The presented cases include a mass dam disaster, burnt human remains, and extensively decomposed human remains.These three cases involved successful human identification with medical findings comparisons using the shadow position technique.Identification could be established in these cases, despite challenges, such as fire damage, an incomplete body, and extensive decomposition.These cases suggest medical findings should be considered as biological identifiers rather than secondary identifiers.
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.