ArticleInfection2016
A 2009 cross-sectional survey of procedures for post-mortem management of highly infectious disease patients in 48 isolation facilities in 16 countries: data from EuroNHID.
Article in Infection, 2016. 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Autopsy practices for high-consequence infectious diseases: global guidelines, alternatives, and the BSL-4 gap.Emerging microbes & infections · 2026Review
- Using autopsies to dissect COVID-19 pathogenesis.Nature microbiology · 2023Review
- Minimally Invasive Tissue Sampling Findings in 12 Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2021Article
- Minimally Invasive Tissue Sampling as an Alternative to Complete Diagnostic Autopsies in the Context of Epidemic Outbreaks and Pandemics: The Example of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2021Article
- Use of post-mortem chest computed tomography in Covid-19 pneumonia.Forensic science international · 2021Article
- Minimally Invasive Autopsy Practice in COVID-19 Cases: Biosafety and Findings.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- COVID-19: Postmortem Diagnostic and Biosafety Considerations.The American journal of forensic medicine and pathology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe handling of human remains may pose a risk for transmission of highly infectious agents. The use of appropriate biosafety measures is very important in case of management of patients deceased from highly infectious diseases (HIDs), such as Ebola virus disease. This paper presents the capabilities and resources in this field in 16 European countries, and suggests indications for the safe post-mortem management of HID patients.
methodsThe European Network for Highly Infectious Diseases conducted in 2009 a survey in 48 isolation facilities in 16 European countries. A set of standardized checklists, filled during on-site visits, have been used for data collection.
resultsThirty-nine facilities (81.2%) reported to have written procedures for the management of human remains, and 27 (56.2%) for the performance of autopsies in HID patients. A Biosafety Level 3 autopsy room was available in eight (16.6%) facilities, other technical devices for safe autopsies were available in nine (18.7%). Overall, four facilities (8.3%) reported to have all features explored for the safe management of human remains. Conversely, in five (10.4%) none of these features were available.
conclusionsThe level of preparedness of surveyed isolation facilities in the field of post-mortem management in case of HIDs was not satisfactory, and improvements are needed.
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.