ReviewDer Pathologe2019
[History of the anatomical and clinical autopsy].
Review in Der Pathologe, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
The history of the autopsy is naturally also a part of the history of anatomy and pathology and spans over about 2300 years. The first documented autopsies were conducted in about 300 B.C. Thereafter, due to the prohibition of dissections due to religious, social, or hygienic reasons, a long period of stagnation took place. With the onset of the Renaissance in the 15th and 16th century, interest in the ancient sciences such as anatomy began to rise and consequently an increasing number of dissections for anatomical studies were conducted. Nevertheless, it took nearly 200 years until clinical symptoms and/or causes of disease and death were correlated with anatomical findings. In the second half of the 19th century, the clinical autopsy based on the combination of macroscopic and microscopic findings became more and more important as a precondition for the systematic description of diseases. Based on autopsy findings and together with several new techniques, modern pathology could be established at the beginning of the 20th century as a source of scientific knowledge for the clinical medicine and as a theoretical discipline of its own.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30062578What 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.