ArticleForensic science international. Synergy2026
Spread of "triad diagnostics" in suspected Shaken Baby Syndrome.
Article in Forensic science international. Synergy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We describe here possibly the first two cases of alleged Shaken Baby Syndome (SBS) in Poland, based solely on "triad findings" (encephalopathy symptoms, subdural hemorrhage/SDH, and retinal hemorrhages/RH), but without signs of relevant trauma. Case #1, a 7-week-old infant girl, is suggested to represent a case of rebleeding in a birth-related SDH. In case #2, a 13-week-old infant boy, we claim that the triad findings were related to benign external hydrocephalus (BEH). Unjustified belief that triad findings are always caused by violent shaking may, apart from the obvious legal and social effects, in case #2 also have contributed to delayed adequate treatment of increased intracranial pressure and subsequent signs of permanent brain damage. We discuss also the traditional SBS hypothesis and its lack of solid scientific evidence, and the uneven geographical acceptance of and belief in this unvalidated hypothesis.
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.