Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Fundamental Attribution Error01:14

Fundamental Attribution Error

13.7K
According to some social psychologists, people tend to overemphasize internal factors as explanations—or attributions—for the behavior of other people. They tend to assume that the behavior of another person is a trait of that person, and to underestimate the power of the situation on the behavior of others. They tend to fail to recognize when the behavior of another is due to situational variables, and thus to the person’s state. This erroneous assumption is...
13.7K
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

9.9K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
9.9K
Random Error01:04

Random Error

9.1K
Random or indeterminate errors originate from various uncontrollable variables, such as variations in environmental conditions, instrument imperfections, or the inherent variability of the phenomena being measured. Usually, these errors cannot be predicted, estimated, or characterized because their direction and magnitude often vary in magnitude and direction even during consecutive measurements. As a result, they are difficult to eliminate. However, the aggregate effect of these errors can be...
9.1K
Margin of Error01:27

Margin of Error

7.0K
The margin of error is also called the maximum error of an estimate. The margin of error is the maximum possible or expected difference between the observed sample parameter value and the actual population parameter value. For proportion, it is the maximum difference between the value of sample proportion obtained from the data and the true value of population proportion. As the true value of the population parameter is not known, the margin of error is calculated using the sample statistic.
7.0K
Contaminants and Errors01:16

Contaminants and Errors

351
Effective sample preparation is crucial for accurate and reliable laboratory analysis. During this process, two significant sources of error can arise: concentration bias from improper sample splitting and contamination caused by methods used to reduce particle size, such as grinding or homogenization. Identifying and minimizing these potential errors is crucial to ensuring the validity of the analysis.
Another key consideration is determining the appropriate number of samples required to...
351
Standard Error of the Mean01:13

Standard Error of the Mean

11.8K
The sampling variability of a statistic is defined as how much the statistic varies from one sample to another. The sampling variability of a statistic is typically measured by measuring its standard error.
The standard error of the mean is an example of a standard error. It is a unique standard deviation known as the standard deviation of the sampling distribution of the mean. The standard error of the mean is a statistic that calculates how correctly a sample distribution represents a...
11.8K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Vaccination reduces central nervous system IL-1β and memory deficits after COVID-19 in mice.

Nature immunology·2024
Same author

Xylazine co-occurrence with illicit fentanyl is a growing threat in the Deep South: a retrospective study of decedent data.

Harm reduction journal·2024
Same author

Post-mortem formation of ethanol: Is 1-propanol a reliable marker? A proof-of-concept study using an in vitro putrefactive environment setup.

Journal of forensic sciences·2024
Same author

Post-exposure intranasal IFNα suppresses replication and neuroinvasion of Venezuelan Equine Encephalitis virus within olfactory sensory neurons.

Journal of neuroinflammation·2024
Same author

Vaccination prevents IL-1β-mediated cognitive deficits after COVID-19.

Research square·2023
Same author

Entry receptor LDLRAD3 is required for Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus peripheral infection and neurotropism leading to pathogenesis in mice.

Cell reports·2023

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 23, 2026

Comprehensive Autopsy Program for Individuals with Multiple Sclerosis
09:41

Comprehensive Autopsy Program for Individuals with Multiple Sclerosis

Published on: July 19, 2019

12.0K

Identifying Errors in Forensic Autopsy Reports Using a Novel Web-Based Program.

Matthew D Cain1, Jason Brazelton2, Daniel W Dye3

  • 1University of Alabama at Birmingham - Pathology.

Academic Forensic Pathology
|June 27, 2019
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

A new computer program can help proofread autopsy reports, improving accuracy by detecting inconsistencies in demographic data and injury descriptions. This tool enhances the quality of forensic documentation for legal and familial review.

Keywords:
AutopsyErrorsForensic pathologyQuality assuranceReport

More Related Videos

Foreign Accent and Forensic Speaker Identification in Voice Lineups: The Influence of Acoustic Features Based on Prosody
09:09

Foreign Accent and Forensic Speaker Identification in Voice Lineups: The Influence of Acoustic Features Based on Prosody

Published on: September 27, 2024

828
Enhanced Genetic Analysis of Single Human Bioparticles Recovered by Simplified Micromanipulation from Forensic ‘Touch DNA’ Evidence
11:49

Enhanced Genetic Analysis of Single Human Bioparticles Recovered by Simplified Micromanipulation from Forensic ‘Touch DNA’ Evidence

Published on: March 9, 2015

16.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 23, 2026

Comprehensive Autopsy Program for Individuals with Multiple Sclerosis
09:41

Comprehensive Autopsy Program for Individuals with Multiple Sclerosis

Published on: July 19, 2019

12.0K
Foreign Accent and Forensic Speaker Identification in Voice Lineups: The Influence of Acoustic Features Based on Prosody
09:09

Foreign Accent and Forensic Speaker Identification in Voice Lineups: The Influence of Acoustic Features Based on Prosody

Published on: September 27, 2024

828
Enhanced Genetic Analysis of Single Human Bioparticles Recovered by Simplified Micromanipulation from Forensic ‘Touch DNA’ Evidence
11:49

Enhanced Genetic Analysis of Single Human Bioparticles Recovered by Simplified Micromanipulation from Forensic ‘Touch DNA’ Evidence

Published on: March 9, 2015

16.6K

Area of Science:

  • Forensic Pathology
  • Medical Informatics
  • Computational Pathology

Background:

  • Autopsy reports are complex documents prone to errors and inconsistencies.
  • Scrutiny by families and legal professionals highlights the need for accurate reports.
  • Manual proofreading is time-consuming and may miss subtle discrepancies.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To develop and evaluate a computer program for proofreading autopsy reports.
  • To enhance the accuracy and consistency of forensic documentation.
  • To identify potential errors in demographic information and injury descriptions.

Main Methods:

  • A webpage-based tool was created to check demographic consistency, organ descriptions, and gunshot wound details.
  • Thirty autopsy reports were analyzed using the tool.
  • Ten deliberate errors were introduced into five reports to test the software's detection capabilities.

Main Results:

  • The tool identified 8 out of 10 intentionally introduced errors, including inconsistencies in age, race, gender, and gunshot wound details.
  • The software occasionally flagged accurate but unusually worded descriptions (e.g., 'uterine wall' instead of 'uterus').
  • No errors were found in the 30 initially analyzed reports, which were accurate upon manual inspection.

Conclusions:

  • Computer-assisted proofreading can significantly improve autopsy report quality and accuracy.
  • The developed webpage is adaptable for additional modules (e.g., strangulation) and expandable vocabulary.
  • The tool is freely available on GitHub for adaptation by other medical examiner offices.