ReviewCritical care (London, England)2010
Clinical review: What is the role for autopsy in the ICU?
Review in Critical care (London, England), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rationale and Design of the MIA Trial: A Proof-of-Concept Study of Minimally Invasive Autopsy in an Infectious Cause of Death in a Scandinavian ICU Setting.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2026Review
- The impact of autopsy participation on clinical residency.Journal of general and family medicine · 2021Article
- Clinical diagnoses vs. autopsy findings in early deceased septic patients in the intensive care: a retrospective cohort study.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2021Article
- Postmortem CT is more accurate than clinical diagnosis for identifying the immediate cause of death in hospitalized patients: a prospective autopsy-based study.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2016Article
- A Pathophysiological Insight into Sepsis and Its Correlation with Postmortem Diagnosis.Mediators of inflammation · 2016Review
- Infective and non-infective endocarditis in critically ill patients: a clinical-pathological study.Internal and emergency medicine · 2014Article
- Preventable mortality evaluation in the ICU.Critical care (London, England) · 2012Review
- Article
- Is routine autopsy in the intensive care unit viable?Critical care (London, England) · 2010Article
- Is routine autopsy in the intensive care unit viable? Authors' response.Critical care (London, England) · 2010Article
- The role for autopsy in the intensive care unit: technological considerations.Critical care (London, England) · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The availability of advanced diagnostic tools has grown in the past decades. Hence, a growing false belief exists that everything is known about the patient before death. Moreover, intensivists may wrongly believe that autopsy findings do not contribute to the understanding of pathophysiological events. The immediate result is that few ICUs nowadays assemble enough autopsy cases with new and interesting clinicopathological features. However, we believe that, at least in tertiary ICUs, autopsies remain a valuable examination, as a tool for quality control, as a way of establishing gold standards for diagnostic examinations and as an aid in developing guidelines for treatment and diagnosis of diseases frequently encountered in the ICU. Finally, due to the ever-expanding armamentarium of immunosuppressive agents, a growing list of opportunistic infections is discovered during autopsy. The present article gives an overview of autopsy studies conducted in the ICU and discusses the pros and cons of performing these.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.