ArticleAJSP: reviews & reports
Rapid Autopsy Programs and Research Support: The Pre- and Post-COVID-19 Environments.
Article in AJSP: reviews & reports. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- T cells are critical for pre-metastatic niche formation through the STAT3/IL-17 axis.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2026Article
- A nationwide survey of Japanese public perceptions of the necessity of antemortem informed consent for Rapid Autopsy Programs (RAP): comparison with other methods of postmortem human tissue utilization.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Implementation of post-mortem examinations within a large population-based cohort: results from the Hamburg City Health Study.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- Brain extraction for fixed tissue banking: a technical report.Free neuropathology · 2026Article
- Experts' attitudes towards 'targeted autopsies' using qualitative interviews in a medical network in Germany.BMJ open · 2025Article
- "This Is How I Give Back": Long-Term Survivors on Legacy and HIV Cure Research at the End of Life-A Qualitative Inquiry in the United States.Infectious disease reports · 2025Article
- Hope for OTHERS (Our Tissue Helping Enhance Research & Science): research results from the University of Pittsburgh rapid autopsy program for breast cancer.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2025Article
- 'Finding Comfort in Discomfort': A Qualitative Study of Cancer Clinicians and Researchers' Experiences of Conducting a Cancer Rapid Autopsy Program.Psycho-oncology · 2025Article
- The boundaries of normal kidney tissue for biomedical research.Current opinion in nephrology and hypertension · 2025Review
- A multi-tissue longitudinal proteomics study to evaluate the suitability of post-mortem samples for pathophysiological research.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Research autopsy programmes in oncology: shared experience from 14 centres across the world.The Journal of pathology · 2024Article
- The Experts Speak: Challenges in Banking Brain Tissue for Research.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2024Article
- Tumor heterogeneity and clinically invisible micrometastases in metastatic breast cancer-a call for enhanced surveillance strategies.NPJ precision oncology · 2024Article
- HIV and COVID-19: two pandemics with significant (but different) central nervous system complications.Free neuropathology · 2024Article
- Pediatric Postmortem Tissue Donation in the Confines of a Pandemic: A Model of Collaboration.Pediatric neurology · 2023Article
- Article
- Proteome alterations in human autopsy tissues in relation to time after death.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2023Article
- Mortui vivos docent: a modern revival of temporal bone plug harvests.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Lessons for Understanding Central Nervous System HIV Reservoirs from the Last Gift Program.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2022Review
- Upregulation of pulmonary tissue factor, loss of thrombomodulin and immunothrombosis in SARS-CoV-2 infection.EClinicalMedicine · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Each rapid autopsy is a powerful opportunity to supply multiple researchers with many valuable tissue specimens at the same time. Since the beginning of the development of rapid autopsy, the overriding organizing principle for all RAPs has been that the samples or organs must be removed and processed as rapidly as possible. To accomplish this some rapid autopsy programs are focused just on one tumor type, while others accept patients demonstrating all tumor types and sometimes other diseases as well. RAPs are logistically complicated and labor-intensive structures, therefore, the key to their success is program flexibility and maintaining a multidisciplinary focus. The necessary collaborations in the complex relationships between clinicians and researchers can be broken down into a series of thought and action steps that must be understood, accepted, and practiced by all participants. A crucial part of the pre-case steps (prior to death) for a rapid autopsy is the study consenting process. It is extremely important that this individualized consent is obtained for postmortem specimens and that it is written in general enough terms to be used for patients with all types of diseases and for an appropriate range of future research uses. The advent of Sars-CoV-2/COVID-19 has presented new challenges and opportunities to the field of autopsy pathology. Guidelines and practice had to be created and adapted to protect physicians and staff while maximizing diagnostic yield. However, any autopsy performed on a patient dying of or with COVID-19 represents a unique opportunity to contribute to understanding of disease mechanisms and to improve death certification, thus assisting in both clinical care and the development of health public policy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33718610PMC7954201W3138578784What 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.