A Triad of Laryngeal Hemorrhages in Strangulation: A Report of Eight Cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The results of histological studies on larynges from eight cases of manual strangulation, all that had intracartilaginous laryngeal hemorrhages, a recently described and under-recognized lesion associated with strangulation, are reported. Formalin-fixed larynges were examined in serial section using a standardized protocol. In all cases, intracartilaginous laryngeal hemorrhages were associated with subepithelial laryngeal hemorrhages, and intralaryngeal muscular hemorrhages forming a "triad of hemorrhages." In five cases, the triad was found in the presence of laryngeal cartilage microfractures. Since cartilage microfractures can be causally related to mechanical injury to the neck, it is likely that the triad of hemorrhages has diagnostic value as an independent morphological criterion for the postmortem diagnosis of strangulation. Since a proportion of cases of strangulation lack characteristics that are self-evidently due to violent application of pressure on the neck, recognition of the triad may have important implications for the postmortem diagnosis of strangulation.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".