2006
DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00265.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Digital Analysis of Experimental Human Bitemarks: Application of Two New Methods

Abstract: Bitemark determination in forensic odontology is commonly performed by comparing the morphology of the dentition of the suspect with life-sized photographs of injury on the victim's skin using transparent overlays or computers. The purpose of this study is to investigate the suitability of two new different methods for identification of bitemarks by digital analysis. A sample of 50 volunteers was asked to make experimental bitemarks on the arms of each other. Stone study casts were prepared from upper and lowe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
9
0
7

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
9
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…Only a few studies have examined distortional factors with regard to skin (24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29). The authors of these studies urged further investigation and acknowledged potential for discrepancies.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Only a few studies have examined distortional factors with regard to skin (24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29). The authors of these studies urged further investigation and acknowledged potential for discrepancies.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two light sources from two directions were fixed to avoid any shadow in the photographs. Several photos were taken of each bite mark to select the most appropriate photograph for the comparison procedure (14). …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Alternatively they may be found on the suspect, left by the victim during self defense. The quality and accuracy of a bite mark are dependent on numerous factors, including time-dependent changes, where the bite mark was found, damage on soft tissue, dental similarity among individuals [7], and poor photography [8][9][10][11], impressions or measurements. If a bite mark is only represented as a bruise it is often extremely difficult to detect any individual characteristics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%