ArticleDer Pathologe2011
[Autopsy as a tool for quality assurance: Leipzig].
Article in Der Pathologe, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post-Mortem Examination as a Quality Improvement Instrument.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2018Review
- [Expectations of visceral surgeons from the results of clinical autopsies].Der Pathologe · 2017Review
- [Adult autopsies during the past decade in Germany : Data from two university hospitals].Der Pathologe · 2017Article
- [Clinical autopsies in Switzerland : A status report].Der Pathologe · 2017Review
- Description of in-hospital deaths in Vienna during 1850-2000.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2016Article
- Changes in autopsy rates among cancer patients and their impact on cancer statistics from a public health point of view: a longitudinal study from 1980 to 2010 with data from Cancer Registry Zurich.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2015Article
- Perfusion SPECT in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism: how much sensitivity is needed to keep patients alive?European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Autopsy rates have declined throughout the world although autopsy serves as an important tool in quality management. Working together with the Department of Heart Surgery of the Heart Centre in Leipzig clinical and autopsy diagnoses were compared. Between 2000 and 2003 an autopsy was performed in 468 patients. Data from clinical and postmortem examinations were prospectively analysed regarding causes of death, concomitant diseases and postoperative complications. Discrepancies between clinical and postmortem cause of death were identified in 23.1% of these patients. In 99.1% of the patients concomitant diseases (e.g. myocardial hypertrophy, pulmonary embolism, former stroke) could be identified, 57.6% were unknown pre-mortem and 19.2% were considered to be of relevance for surgical therapy. Autopsy is the final and most comprehensive physical examination. Autopsy is also the basis of training for pathologists in interpreting interrelated diagnoses. Therefore the task of pathologists is to enhance the appreciation of autopsy among clinical colleagues by working closely side by side. By communication an autopsy can deliver an effective achievement in terms of being relevant for praxis.
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.