ArticleCureus2025
Pattern and Forensic Significance of Defense Injuries in Homicide Cases: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Defense injuries play a crucial role in forensic investigations by providing insights into the nature of an assault, the type of weapon used, and the manner of death. This study aims to analyze the prevalence, patterns, and forensic significance of defense injuries in homicide cases. Methods A retrospective observational study was conducted on 60 homicide cases with documented defense injuries. Data was collected from autopsy reports, crime scene records, and inquest papers over a five-year period at a tertiary care hospital and compared. The injuries were categorized based on type, anatomical distribution, and the weapon involved. Statistical analysis was performed to assess the relationship between defense injuries and weapon type. Results Defense injuries were most commonly observed on the hands 48 (80%), forearms 39 (65%), and fingers 24 (40%). Incised wounds were predominant 36 (60%) in knife attacks, whereas contusions and fractures were frequently seen 33(55%) in blunt force trauma cases. Gunshot victims showed fewer defense injuries 12 (20%), often in the form of abrasions or contusions. The analysis indicated a significant correlation between the type of weapon and the nature of defense wounds (p<0.05). Conclusion The study highlights the forensic importance of defense injuries in homicide cases, aiding in crime scene reconstruction and medico-legal investigations. Proper documentation of these injuries can strengthen legal proceedings and ensure justice.
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.