Pretty I A
The University of Liverpool, Department of Clinical Dental Sciences, Edwards Building, Daulby Street, Liverpool, L69 3GN.
J Forensic Sci. 2003 Sep;48(5):1117-20.
Within the field of forensic dentistry, the detection, collection, and analysis of bitemarks remains one of the most contentious areas. Attempts at the production of consensus documents have produced documents such as the ABFO's Guidelines for Bitemark Evidence Collection. Despite this, the range of differing analysis techniques, allied with a varied opinion base on the robustness of bitemark conclusions has led to polarized views within the profession. The purpose of this study was to survey forensic dentists to obtain their views on a number of crucial components of bitemark theory and contentious areas within the discipline. Using a web-based survey, 14 questions were asked of respondents. Seventy-two odontologists completed the survey, with 38% being of Diplomate status, 10% had completed 20 or more bitemark cases, and 20% between 10 and 20 cases, 91% of respondents believed that the human dentition was unique, with 78% believing that this uniqueness could be represented on human skin during the biting process. Seventy percent believed that they could positively identify an individual from a bitemark, and 22% stated that the statistical tool, the product rule, should be applied to bitemark conclusions. Over half of the odontologists used overlays for bitemark analysis. with a digital method of production the most popular. The implications of these and other findings are discussed.
在法医牙科学领域，咬痕的检测、采集和分析仍然是最具争议的领域之一。为达成共识文件所做的努力产生了诸如美国法医牙科学会（ABFO）的咬痕证据采集指南等文件。尽管如此，不同的分析技术，再加上对咬痕结论可靠性的各种不同观点，导致了该行业内观点的两极分化。本研究的目的是调查法医牙医，以了解他们对咬痕理论的一些关键组成部分以及该学科内有争议领域的看法。通过基于网络的调查，向受访者提出了14个问题。72名牙科学家完成了调查，其中38%具有 Diplomate 资格，10%完成了20个或更多的咬痕案例，20%完成了10至20个案例，91%的受访者认为人类牙列是独特的，78%的受访者认为这种独特性在咬人过程中可以在人类皮肤上体现出来。70%的人认为他们可以从咬痕中明确识别出个人，22%的人表示统计工具乘积法则应应用于咬痕结论。超过一半的牙科学家在咬痕分析中使用叠加法，其中数字制作方法最受欢迎。本文讨论了这些发现及其他发现的意义。
