ArticleForensic science, medicine, and pathology2016
Reliability of body size measurements obtained at autopsy: impact on the pathologic assessment of the heart.
Article in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Guidance for Systematic Integration of Undernutrition in Attributing Cause of Death in Children.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2021Article
- Factors associated with myocardial SARS-CoV-2 infection, myocarditis, and cardiac inflammation in patients with COVID-19.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2021Article
- Infants with congenital heart defects have reduced brain volumes.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose Assessment of body size at autopsy is important for interpreting organ weight measurements and in some cases body identification. The reliability of post-mortem body size measurements, the causes for perturbations in these measurements from their corresponding pre-mortem values, and the impact of such perturbations on heart weight interpretation have not been fully explored. Methods Autopsy body length and weight measurements and pre-mortem height and body weight measurements were compared in 132 autopsies. Clinical records were evaluated for peripheral edema and serum albumin levels. Causes of death, body cavity fluid collections, and heart weights were obtained from the autopsy reports. A subset of patients underwent quantitative post-mortem computed tomography assessment of anasarca. Results At autopsy, body weight differed from the pre-mortem value by 11 ± 1 %, compared with -0.2 ± 0.3 % for body length (P < 0.0001). The percent change in body weight at autopsy correlated with the presence of peripheral edema (14 ± 2 % vs. 7 ± 2 %, P = 0.01), serum albumin < 3.0 g/dL (16 ± 2 % vs. 7 ± 2 %, P = 0.001), and the degree of anasarca (P = 0.01). In 4 % of autopsies, heart weights were abnormal based on the pre-mortem body weight, but would be classified as normal based on the elevated post-mortem body weight. Conclusions At autopsy, body weight is a less reliable parameter than body length in correlating with the corresponding pre-mortem measurement. Autopsy body weights are elevated in part due to peripheral edema/anasarca. Alterations in body weight at autopsy can confound the interpretation of organ weight measurements.
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.