SynthesisInternational journal of legal medicine2022
Sensitivity and specificity of post-mortem computed tomography in skull fracture detection-a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of legal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of postmortem computed tomography and traditional autopsy in fracture detection: a meta-analysis.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of post-mortem computed tomography for fractures of the hyoid-larynx complex.International journal of legal medicine · 2024Pooled it
- The impact of forensic experience on postmortem CT interpretation in firearm deaths: an interobserver reliability study.La Radiologia medica · 2026Observational
- New insights on Ötzi's injuries from a clinical perspective.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Postmortem CT and autopsy findings in an elevator-related death: a case report.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2025Article
- Advances and Challenges in Traumatic Brain Injury from a Forensic Perspective.Current neuropharmacology · 2025Review
- Application of postmortem computed tomography angiography to settle a medical dispute after aortic dissection surgery: a forensic case report.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Post-mortem computed tomography (PMCT) has been increasingly used as routine examination in forensic pathology. No recent review of the growing number of papers on the ability of PMCT to detect skull fracture exists, and original papers report sensitivities from 0.85 to 1.00. This systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42021233264) aims to provide a meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity of PMCT in skull fracture detection. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE and Embase for papers published between January 2000 and August 2021 reporting raw numbers, sensitivity and specificity or Abbreviated Injury Score for PMCT compared to autopsy. Papers without both PMCT and autopsy, no separate reporting of the neuro-cranium, exclusively on children, sharp trauma, gunshot or natural death as well as case reports and reviews were excluded. Two authors independently performed inclusion, bias assessment and data extraction. QUADAS-2 was used for bias assessment and a random effects models used for meta-analysis. From 4.284 hits, 18 studies were eligible and 13 included in the meta-analysis for a total of 1538 cases. All deceased were scanned on multi-slice scanners with comparable parameters. Images were evaluated by radiologists or pathologists. Intra- and inter-observer analyses were rarely reported. In summary, sensitivity of PMCT for detection of fractures in the skull base was 0.87 [0.80; 0.92] with specificity 0.96 [0.90; 0.98], and sensitivity for the vault was 0.89 [0.80; 0.94] with specificity 0.96 [0.91; 0.98]. The mixed samples are a limitation of the review.
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.