SynthesisForensic science, medicine, and pathology2026
Blunt force vs. fall-induced head trauma: a systematic review and methodological framework.
Synthesis in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Chestnut and the Imperfect Crime: A Case Report of Femicide and Staged Road Accident.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Blunt force trauma evaluation is a challenging topic in forensic investigations, frequently associated with violent assaults, homicides, and accidental falls. Distinguishing between injuries caused by direct blows and those resulting from falls is essential for accurate medico-legal assessments. Commonly applied forensic analytical methods demonstrate limitations, necessitating a more comprehensive assessment approach. In this paper a systematic review using PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases has been performed. This systematic review explores forensic methodologies for distinguishing between different trauma mechanisms by analyzing injury patterns, fracture characteristics, and advancements in technology. The objective is to evaluate the forensic techniques most commonly utilized by researchers to differentiate between blunt head trauma and fall-related injuries while also establishing a structured approach for the thorough investigation of these complex cases. Recent forensic advancements, including micro-computed tomography (µCT), Finite Element Modeling (FEM), and 3D reconstruction, enhance trauma analysis by providing detailed insights into injury mechanisms. These technologies, combined with imaging modalities such as CT scans and biomechanical modeling, improve forensic accuracy in differentiating trauma etiologies. Conclusion. This review underscores the importance of integrating multiple forensic tools to refine investigative procedures and establish standardized approaches for analyzing complex trauma cases. In addition, a proposal for a schematic flow chart summarizing the post-mortem activities that can be performed in forensic practice, which can be adapted in relation to each case, has been created.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41082140What 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.