ReviewInternational journal of legal medicine2026
Death by hanging: possibilities and limits of medico-legal evidence.
Review in International journal of legal medicine, 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.
- A critical review of autopsy findings in cases of suicidal hanging and the effect of a layered neck dissection.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
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
In forensic medicine, hanging is a frequent cause of non-natural death which may pose diagnostic problems on the investigator due to the manifold and sometimes ambiguous autopsy findings. The great variability of appearances potentially impedes the classification as to the manner of death (suicide, accident, homicide). The significance of some signs formerly considered to prove vital suspension could not always be confirmed in more recent studies. Therefore, traditional conception passed on from generation to generation must be critically questioned and, if necessary, replaced by evidence-based knowledge derived from systematic evaluations of relevant case material and laboratory tests, where appropriate. Bearing in mind the numerous possible misinterpretations, a dogmatic view must be avoided in favour of a cautious and holistic assessment. The review presented here provides an overview of problem areas based on the pertinent literature, photographic material of real cases and the authors' professional experience.
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.