MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606852455 · doi:10.23907/2016.005

Pitfalls and Artifacts in the Neck at Autopsy

2016· review· en· W2606852455 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Forensic Pathology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRestraint-Related Deaths
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutopsyForensic pathologyHyoid boneMedicineConvictionExpert opinionGeneral surgeryPathologyAnatomyIntensive care medicineLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The diagnosis of strangulation at autopsy is a persistent challenge for the forensic pathologist. The main difficulty is interpreting the observations made at the postmortem table and deciding whether the observations are a sufficient basis to render an expert opinion that death was caused by external compression of the neck. This may have considerable importance to the criminal justice system and may lead to a conviction for murder. There are five main pitfalls and artifacts encountered in the neck at postmortem examination. These five areas provide the majority of the interpretative difficulties experienced by the pathologist. These challenges include: 1) developmental anatomy of the hyoid bone; 2) triticeous cartilages; 3) Prinsloo-Gordon hemorrhage; 4) postmortem hypostatic hemorrhage; and 5) resuscitation-related neck injury. This review explores these five areas. Awareness of the pitfalls and artifacts in the neck is essential for a satisfactory and evidence-based approach to interpreting observations of the neck at autopsy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it