ReviewAcademic forensic pathology2017
Recommendations for the Autopsy of an Infant who has Died Suddenly and Unexpectedly.
Review in Academic forensic pathology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hidden and Under-Recognized Causes of Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy (SUDI): A Comprehensive Review of Autopsy Findings.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Neuropathologic findings and age-related differences in Finnish pediatric medico-legal autopsies.Journal of forensic sciences · 2026Article
- From Fragile Lives to Forensic Truth: Multimodal Forensic Approaches to Pediatric Homicide and Suspect Death.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErrata.2017
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As the result of improved death scene investigations and the performance of more thorough and thoughtful pediatric forensic autopsies, there has been a widespread increase in the recognition of asphyxial mechanisms of death as well as lethal natural diseases that might have otherwise been erroneously labeled as sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) or sudden unexpected infant death (SUID). Although it is fair to state that "more thorough autopsies provide more thorough medical evidence" from which to draw upon when determining cause and manner of death, there is no standard, accepted baseline from which forensic pathologists operate. Although anatomic pathologists are quite accustomed to practicing within well-defined boundaries for specimen (and thus diagnostic) adequacy, forensic pathologists are frequently hesitant to embrace or adopt such concepts. This has made it difficult to evaluate standards of practice in forensic pathology. Recommendations have been developed and published by the National Association of Medical Examiners for the postmortem assessment of suspected infant head trauma. However, significant variation exists in the way autopsies are performed on infants without trauma, such as the common scenario of an infant who has died suddenly and unexpectedly of asphyxial or apparent natural means. A wide variety of autopsy techniques and ancillary studies are available to forensic pathologists, but as survey data indicates, are not consistently used throughout the United States. This paper will discuss the different components of the pediatric autopsy and make recommendations for the best use of available tests and consultation services.
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.