Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26183833›Full record

ArticleDer Pathologe2015

[Autopsy of children, neonates, fetuses and embryos: Preparation, technique and report writing].

N Sarioglu, G Turowski

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Pathologe, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

N SariogluInstitut für Orale Struktur- und Entwicklungsbiologie, Charité Campus Benjamin Franklin, Freie Universität Berlin, Aßmannshauser Str. 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Deutschland, nanette.sarioglu@charite.de.
G Turowski
Freie Universität Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Information obtained from the autopsies of children, neonates, fetuses and embryos, may not only be useful to explain the loss experienced by the parents but also to estimate the risk of recurrence. The detection of diseases by an autopsy helps to reduce the risk as well as with the planning of the next pregnancy and the optimal care of mother and fetus. Although incidences are continually dropping, according to the World Health Organization (WHO) statistics each year at least 2.6 million children worldwide suffer intrauterine death after the 28th week of pregnancy. Despite a general decrease in the number of autopsies, the parents agreed to a post-mortem examination in 500 out of 512 cases. The post-mortem examination and interpretation of results of children differ from those obtained from adults. As a supplement to previous publications, this article discusses these differences and may provide standardized instructions on performing autopsies and evaluation of autopsy findings.

Indexed as

Age FactorsAutopsyCause of DeathCongenital AbnormalitiesDocumentationEmbryo Implantation, DelayedFemaleFetal DeathGestational AgeHumansInfant, NewbornMalePhotographyPlacentaPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID26183833
OpenAlexW2217275329

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.