ArticleCommunications medicine2026
A multi-country epidemiological analysis of mortality from landmines and other explosive ordnance.
Article in Communications medicine, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExplosive ordnance including landmines, improvised explosive devices and explosive remnants of war are known to contaminate at least fifty-eight countries, threatening the health of affected communities across generations. Despite the scale of this problem, mortality estimates pertaining to these weapons are limited in scope. This study addresses this knowledge gap by conducting a multi-country epidemiological study on explosive weapons casualties in low-resource settings.
methodsA retrospective analysis of secondary data was conducted with data sourced from mine action authorities and centres, and international non-government organisations from across 17 countries. Casualty information contained included demographics, mortality, injury data, and incident details. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to assess which characteristics were associated with mortality and survival.
resultsHere we show one of the largest epidemiological analyses, to date, of explosive weapons casualties. The overall case fatality rate was 38.8% and females have an elevated risk of fatal outcomes. Overall, children experience lower odds of death compared to adults; and, improvised explosive devices have the highest lethality of the weapons examined.
conclusionsThis research highlights the lethality of explosive weapons among local casualties, with a case fatality rate significantly higher than that observed in high-resource civilian or military trauma systems, illustrating the deadliness and indiscriminate nature of these devices. The findings of this analysis can inform injury prevention and trauma care initiatives targeting preventable death and disability for casualties of explosive ordnance.
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.