Reading between the lesions: Recognizing intent in pediatric burn injuries.

IF 1.8
Alice Buzzelli, Alberto Amadasi, Lorenzo Franceschetti, Valentina Bugelli
{"title":"Reading between the lesions: Recognizing intent in pediatric burn injuries.","authors":"Alice Buzzelli, Alberto Amadasi, Lorenzo Franceschetti, Valentina Bugelli","doi":"10.1111/1556-4029.70473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Burn injuries are common in childhood and may occur in accidental or non-accidental circumstances, making forensic interpretation challenging. Evaluation is difficult when clinical findings, reported history, and contextual evidence are incomplete or discordant. We present three pediatric cases evaluated through a structured forensic approach integrating clinical findings, lesion morphology, reported circumstances, developmental assessment, scene reconstruction, and experimental testing. The first involved a 7-year-old girl with scald burns of the buttocks and right lower limb following the reported rupture of a bag filled with boiling water; analysis supported an accidental mechanism. The second concerned a 9-month-old boy with deep partial-thickness burns of the left hand reportedly caused by accidental contact with a stove hot plate; lesion analysis, scene reconstruction, thermal testing, and developmental assessment were inconsistent with the reported history and supported abuse. The third involved a 13-year-old girl with multiple rounded burn-like skin lesions in different stages of healing; extensive clinical investigations did not identify a specific dermatologic or systemic cause, while toxicological analysis of lesional skin supported exposure to an aluminum-containing topical product, namely her deodorant. Multidisciplinary assessment indicated a deliberate mechanism, with self-infliction considered the most probable interpretation. These cases show that no single feature is diagnostically decisive in the forensic assessment of pediatric burns. Determination of injury mechanism and intentionality requires multidisciplinary integration of lesion morphology, developmental plausibility, thermal dynamics, toxicological findings, and scene reconstruction. In this case series, this structured approach supported three distinct mechanisms: accidental scald injury, inflicted contact burn, and deliberate self-inflicted burn-like injury.</p>","PeriodicalId":94080,"journal":{"name":"Journal of forensic sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of forensic sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.70473","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Burn injuries are common in childhood and may occur in accidental or non-accidental circumstances, making forensic interpretation challenging. Evaluation is difficult when clinical findings, reported history, and contextual evidence are incomplete or discordant. We present three pediatric cases evaluated through a structured forensic approach integrating clinical findings, lesion morphology, reported circumstances, developmental assessment, scene reconstruction, and experimental testing. The first involved a 7-year-old girl with scald burns of the buttocks and right lower limb following the reported rupture of a bag filled with boiling water; analysis supported an accidental mechanism. The second concerned a 9-month-old boy with deep partial-thickness burns of the left hand reportedly caused by accidental contact with a stove hot plate; lesion analysis, scene reconstruction, thermal testing, and developmental assessment were inconsistent with the reported history and supported abuse. The third involved a 13-year-old girl with multiple rounded burn-like skin lesions in different stages of healing; extensive clinical investigations did not identify a specific dermatologic or systemic cause, while toxicological analysis of lesional skin supported exposure to an aluminum-containing topical product, namely her deodorant. Multidisciplinary assessment indicated a deliberate mechanism, with self-infliction considered the most probable interpretation. These cases show that no single feature is diagnostically decisive in the forensic assessment of pediatric burns. Determination of injury mechanism and intentionality requires multidisciplinary integration of lesion morphology, developmental plausibility, thermal dynamics, toxicological findings, and scene reconstruction. In this case series, this structured approach supported three distinct mechanisms: accidental scald injury, inflicted contact burn, and deliberate self-inflicted burn-like injury.

阅读病变之间:识别儿童烧伤的意图。
烧伤在儿童时期很常见,可能发生在意外或非意外情况下,这使得法医解释具有挑战性。当临床发现、报告的病史和背景证据不完整或不一致时,评估是困难的。我们介绍了三个儿科病例,通过结构化的法医方法评估临床表现,病变形态,报告的情况,发育评估,场景重建和实验测试。第一起病例涉及一名7岁女孩,据报道,她的臀部和右下肢被烫伤,原因是装满沸水的袋子破裂;分析支持一种偶然机制。第二起涉及一名9个月大的男孩,他的左手深度部分烧伤,据报道是由于意外接触炉灶加热板引起的;病变分析、现场重建、热测试和发育评估与报道的病史和支持滥用不一致。第三例涉及一名13岁女孩,她在不同的愈合阶段有多个圆形烧伤样皮肤病变;广泛的临床调查没有确定具体的皮肤病学或全身性原因,而病变皮肤的毒理学分析支持暴露于含铝的局部产品,即她的除臭剂。多学科评估表明这是一种蓄意的机制,自我施加被认为是最可能的解释。这些病例表明,在儿科烧伤的法医评估中,没有单一的特征是诊断决定性的。损伤机制和意向性的确定需要多学科的整合,包括病变形态学、发育合理性、热动力学、毒理学发现和现场重建。在这个案例系列中,这种结构化的方法支持三种不同的机制:意外烫伤,造成的接触烧伤和故意造成的类似烧伤的伤害。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书