ArticleForensic science, medicine, and pathology2019
Does the medical autopsy still have a place in the current diagnostic process? A 6-year retrospective study in two French University hospitals.
Article in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The evolution of postmortem investigation: a historical perspective on autopsy's decline and imaging's role in its revival.Frontiers in radiology · 2025Article
- Necrotizing amebic colitis in an elder patient: an unexpected autopsy finding.Autopsy & case reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical autopsies have been in considerable decline for several decades, in France and worldwide. We aimed to determine whether a medical autopsy still currently has a role to play in diagnosis, by analyzing its performance and diagnostic limitations. This dual-centre retrospective descriptive study included all medical autopsies performed in the university hospitals of Lille and Marseille, France, between January 2007 and December 2012. Autopsies of fetuses or stillborn infants, or those related to sudden infant deaths and research protocols were excluded. 412 medical autopsies were included. The male:female ratio was 1.5:1 and mean age was 27.3 years. Half of all autopsies were pediatric. Regarding anatomical region and/or injury mechanism, a clinical diagnosis was suggested in 52.2% of cases, an autopsy diagnosis in 55.6% and a microscopic diagnosis in 81.8%. There was very low agreement between the clinician's suggested diagnosis and the final diagnosis, both for organ specific diseases and cause of death. Agreement was moderate between autopsy diagnoses and microscopic diagnoses for organ specific diseases and low for cause of death. From our findings we concluded that an autopsy associated with microscopic examination was still valuable in diagnosing cause of death. Microscopic examination was indispensable to determine certain causes of death.
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.