ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2026
Diagnostic accuracy of rib fracture detection in forensic post-mortem photon counting CT.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecently, post-mortem photon-counting CT (PMPCCT) has been introduced to forensic imaging. Compared to conventional energy integrating post-mortem CT (PMCT), PMPCCT enables ultra-high resolution (UHR) imaging, which is particularly suitable for visualizing fine fractures and fissures. These are often found in rib trauma, which is usually relevant in forensic medicine. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of rib fracture detection using PMPCCT compared to PMCT and forensic autopsy.
methodsA total of n = 20 bodies that had suffered blunt chest trauma before death and n = 5 non-trauma control cases were investigated. PMCT and PMPCCT were conducted prior to forensic autopsy. Two observers (radiologist and forensic pathologist) analyzed PMCT images (reconstructed with a slice thickness of 0.5 mm in a 512 matrix) and PMPCCT images (reconstructed with slice thicknesses of 0.5 mm and 0.2 mm (UHR) in a 1024 matrix). Imaging diagnosis of rib fractures was compared to autopsy diagnosis as gold standard. The diagnosis of different types of rib fractures assessed at imaging was compared between PMCT and PMPCCT.
resultsInter-rater agreement between the two observers was good (κ = 0.79). Both PMCT and PMPCCT diagnosed less rib fractures than the autopsy (n = 356 fractures). Compared to PMCT, UHR-PMPCCT demonstrated slightly higher sensitivity (e.g., 92% vs. 82% in observer 1), slightly higher specificity (e.g., 97% vs. 95%), and lower positive predictive value (e.g., 75% vs. 82%) for the diagnosis of all rib fractures. Chi-squared tests showed significant differences (p-value < 0.05 in both observers) between UHR-PMPCCT and PMCT for the diagnosis of incomplete rib fractures with visible dehiscence of one cortical line.
conclusionBased on the results, it is questionable whether PMPCCT offers additional forensic value over PMCT for the specific forensic issue of diagnosing rib fractures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.