Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25680317›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2015

How to optimise the yield of forensic and clinical post-mortem microbiology with an adequate sampling: a proposal for standardisation.

A Fernández-Rodríguez, M C Cohen, J Lucena, W Van de Voorde, A Angelini, N Ziyade, V Saegeman

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Utility of postmortem bacterial culture of abdominal organs at autopsy of young calves.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Effect of Time Since Death on Multipathogen Molecular Test Results of Postmortem Specimens Collected Using Minimally Invasive Tissue Sampling Techniques.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. How is post-mortem microbiology appraised by pathologists? Results from a practice survey conducted by ESGFOR.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

A Fernández-RodríguezForensic Microbiology Laboratory, Instituto Nacional de Toxicología y Ciencias Forenses, Madrid, Spain, amparo.fernandezrodriguez@justicia.es.
M C Cohen
J Lucena
W Van de Voorde
A Angelini
N Ziyade
V Saegeman

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Post-mortem microbiology (PMM) is an important tool in forensic pathology, helping to determine the cause and manner of death, especially in difficult scenarios such as sudden unexpected death (SD). Currently, there is a lack of standardization of PMM sampling throughout Europe. We present recommendations elaborated by a panel of European experts aimed to standardize microbiological sampling in the most frequent forensic and clinical post-mortem situations. A network of forensic microbiologists, pathologists and physicians from Spain, England, Belgium, Italy and Turkey shaped a flexible protocol providing minimal requirements for PMM sampling at four practical scenarios: SD, bioterrorism, tissue and cell transplantation (TCT) and paleomicrobiology. Biosafety recommendations were also included. SD was categorized into four subgroups according to the age of the deceased and circumstances at autopsy: (1) included SD in infancy and childhood (0-16 years); (2) corresponded to SD in the young (17-35 years); (3) comprised SD at any age with clinical symptoms; and (4) included traumatic/iatrogenic SD. For each subgroup, a minimum set of samples and general recommendations for microbiological analyses were established. Sampling recommendations for main bioterrorism scenarios were provided. In the TCT setting, the Belgian sampling protocol was presented as an example. Finally, regarding paleomicrobiology, the sampling selection for different types of human remains was reviewed. This proposal for standardization in the sampling constitutes the first step towards a consensus in PMM procedures. In addition, the protocol flexibility to adapt the sampling to the clinical scenario and specific forensic findings adds a cost-benefit value.

Indexed as

AutopsyEuropeForensic PathologyHumansMicrobiological TechniquesSpecimen Handling

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.