↓ Skip to main content

Forensic answers to the 14th of July 2016 terrorist attack in Nice

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Legal Medicine, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#46 of 2,090)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Forensic answers to the 14th of July 2016 terrorist attack in Nice
Published in
International Journal of Legal Medicine, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00414-018-1833-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gérald Quatrehomme, Unité Police d’Identification de Victimes de Catastrophes, Steve Toupenay, Tania Delabarde, Bernard Padovani, Véronique Alunni

Abstract

The terrorist attack of July 14, 2016 in Nice (France) was a devastating event. A man voluntarily drove a truck into a crowd gathered for the fireworks display on the seaside "Promenade des Anglais," plowing pedestrians down over more than 2 km before being shot dead. At the time of this report, a total of 86 casualties and more than 1200 formal complaints for physical and psychological injuries have been recorded. The aim of this work is to describe the forensic management of this event and its immediate aftermath. This paper reaffirms the basic tenets of disaster management: a single place of work, teamwork in times of crisis, a single communication channel with families and the media, and the validation of the identifications by a multidisciplinary commission. This paper highlights other essential aspects of the organization of the forensic effort put in place after the Nice attack: the contribution of the police at the crime scene, the cooperation between the disaster victim identification (DVI) team, and the forensic pathologists at the morgue, applying the identification (ID) process to unconscious victims in the intensive care unit, the input of volunteers, and the logistics associated with the management of the aftermath of the event. All of the victims were positively identified within 4 and a half days. For the first time in such a paper, the central role of medical students in the immediate aftermath of the disaster is outlined. The need to address the possible psychological trauma of the non-medical and even the medical staff taking part in the forensic effort is also reaffirmed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 19 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 16%
Social Sciences 7 14%
Computer Science 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 21 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 05 May 2022.
All research outputs
#1,555,605
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#46
of 2,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,196
of 327,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#1
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,090 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 327,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.