Sharp force trauma analysis in bone and cartilage: A literature review.

Clicks: 279
ID: 17946
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Star

Ranked #66 of 132 articles by views in forensic science international

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 132 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Sharp force trauma (SFT) in bone and cartilage has been studied extensively. This literature review summarizes knife and saw mark research. Researchers have documented several features of cut surfaces and successfully associated them with various tool characteristics. Most study designs are based on light microscopic examination, but other technologies such as micro-computed scanning, scanning electron microscope, and epifluorescence microscopy have been investigated. Researchers have worked with human and non-human material, and found that the presentation of SFT differs between the two. Furthermore, they have designed studies to control the parameters surrounding SFT (e.g., tool angle, force, direction) as well as not to control these parameters (real-world scenario) and have found that the trauma produced in the two scenarios differ considerably. Researchers have attempted to calculate the error rate associated with cut and saw mark analysis and have reported very different results. Several high profile cases of successful SFT analysis have been published and are briefly reviewed. Expert testimony based on cut and saw mark analysis has been found admissible, but not in all cases. Unfortunately, researchers have not consistently used standard terminology, a list of terms gathered from the literature is provided. Despite the extensive research, more work is needed. Methods that mitigate potential sources of error that are not dependent on analyst's experience must be developed.
Reference Key
love2019sharpforensic Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Love, Jennifer C;
Journal forensic science international
Year 2019
DOI
S0379-0738(19)30113-6
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.