ArticleForensic science international2015
The importance of microbiological testing for establishing cause of death in 42 forensic autopsies.
Article in Forensic science international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Microbiology in minimally invasive autopsy: best techniques to detect infection. ESGFOR (ESCMID study group of forensic and post-mortem microbiology) guidelines.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2021Guideline
- Postmortem Microbiology in Forensic Diagnostics: Interpretation of Infectious Causes of Death and Emerging Applications.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Postmortem microbiological sampling: a prospective ESGFOR-supported study on relevance, timing, and site selection.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2025Article
- Seamless analysis of liquid samples by coupling a thermal desorption chip with ion mobility spectrometry.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Microbial genomics: a potential toolkit for forensic investigations.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2025Review
- Forensic Microbiology: When, Where and How.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Post-Mortem Microbiology: Retrospective Analysis of Infections Caused byPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Forensic Applications of Microbiomics: A Review.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microorganisms have always been one of the great challenges of humankind, being responsible for both high morbidity and mortality throughout history. In a forensic setting microbiological information will always be difficult to interpret due to lack of antemortem information and changes in flora postmortem. With this study we aim to review the use of microbiological procedures at our forensic institute. In a retrospective study including 42 autopsies performed at our Institute, where microbiological test had been applied, analyses were made with regard to: type of microbiological tests performed, microorganisms found, histological findings, antemortem information, C-reactive protein measurement and cause of death. Fiftyone different microorganisms were found distributed among 37 cases, bacteria being the most abundant. Nineteen of the cases were classified as having a microbiological related cause of death. C-reactive protein levels were raised in 14 cases of the 19 cases, histological findings either supported or were a decisive factor for the classification of microbiologically related cause of death in 14 cases. As a multitude of abundant microorganisms are able to cause infection under the right circumstances, all findings should be compared to anamnestic antemortem information, before conclusions are drawn. A definite list of true pathogens is nearly impossible to compile.
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.