ReviewDer Pathologe2017
[Clinical autopsies in Switzerland : A status report].
Review in Der Pathologe, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Autopsy rates and diagnostic errors in a Swiss community hospital: a ten-year retrospective analysis.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2025Article
- [A retrospective mortality analysis of natural deaths of the 65+ generation based on postmortem autopsies performed at the Institute of Legal Medicine in Frankfurt am Main during two periods].Rechtsmedizin (Berlin, Germany) · 2021Article
- Changes in Clinical and Legal Autopsy Rates in Korea from 2001 to 2015.Journal of Korean medical science · 2019Article
- Trends and risk factors for death and excess all-cause mortality among notified tuberculosis patients in the UK: an analysis of surveillance data.ERJ open research · 2019Article
- Implementation of modern tools in autopsy practice-the way towards contemporary postmortal diagnostics.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe number of autopsies has been steadily declining worldwide over the past decades. The reasons for this are diverse. Legislation regarding opposition and consent rules does not appear to have had a significant impact on the autopsy rates. Above all, structural causes and the attitude of the medical profession are the reasons for this decline. The main argument for a high autopsy rate is the identification of diagnostic errors; however, diagnostic discrepancies are relatively independent of the rate of autopsies performed. At the University Hospital (UniversitätsSpital) Zurich it could be shown in a study that from 1972-2002 the frequency of relevant diagnostic discrepancies (classes I and II) decreased from 30% to 7%.
objectiveThe aim of this article is to present the necessity of a stable autopsy rate and to examine the situation of the autopsy in Switzerland. MATERIAL AND
methodsFor this purpose, the importance of autopsies in the fields of quality assurance of medical diagnostics, cancer statistics, medical research as well as further education of doctors in Switzerland is shown. Efforts are being made by the pathologists to counteract the declining autopsy rates. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Declining autopsy numbers have a significant influence on cancer statistics. The rate of newly discovered tumors in autopsies in Switzerland decreased from 42% in 1980 to 17% in 2010. Pediatric autopsies are an important tool for quality assurance of medical diagnostics in neonatology and pediatrics in Switzerland, but the rate of autopsies carried out is also declining. Postmortem magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations (virtopsy) could increase the acceptance of the parents for an autopsy in the future. Autopsies make an important contribution in research and in documentation of therapy-associated side effects and they are an important component of further education of the upcoming medical generations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28752179What 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.