ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2026
Best practice for forensic anthropology reporting: a statement by the Board of the Forensic Anthropology Society of Europe (FASE).
Article 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. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The case report is the primary means by which forensic anthropologists communicate the outcomes of their examination. Despite their central role, considerable variability currently exists in the content, structure, and clarity of such reports. Drawing on published guidelines, forensic science standards, and the collective experience of an international group of practitioners from the Board of the Forensic Anthropology Society of Europe (FASE), this paper presents practical recommendations for forensic anthropology reporting. It outlines the fundamental aims and principles of reporting, identifies essential report elements, and distinguishes minimum requirements from discretionary components. Emphasis is placed on scientific integrity, transparency of methods and reasoning, and clear communication to a diverse audience. These recommendations are meant to be applicable across jurisdictions and professional contexts, including independent practice, while remaining aligned with contemporary forensic science standards. By promoting consistency and clarity in reporting, these recommendations aim to support the reliability, interpretability, and admissibility of forensic anthropological evidence, and to strengthen the contribution of forensic anthropology to medico-legal investigations.
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.