| Title |
A valid method to determine the site of drowning
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Legal Medicine, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00414-017-1708-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rafael Carballeira, Duarte N. Vieira, Manuel Febrero-Bande, José I. Muñoz Barús |
| Abstract |
The diatom test is considered a useful aid in determining the site of death from drowning. Nevertheless, there is disagreement within the scientific community concerning its reliability, and its findings have been challenged and sometimes overturned in courts of law. Using a model based on animal experimentation, we have developed a diatom test to discriminate between the locations of drowning sites from different aquatic systems. We carried out a complementary combination of quantitative and qualitative analyses together with a statistical analysis based on the Kullback-Leibler distance of the samples. A restrictive selection of exclusive diatom species from each reservoir was also made. This approach allowed us to validate the usefulness of the diatom test in determining the location of the site of drowning. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Engineering | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 20% |
| Unknown | 17 | 49% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 August 2018.
All research outputs
#14,958,596
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#856
of 2,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,282
of 331,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#30
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,084 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,430 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.