ArticleGlobal public health2023
Navigating uncertainties of death: Minimally Invasive Autopsy Technology in global health.
Article in Global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- HCV-specific CD4EBioMedicine · 2026Article
- Perceptions of death, dying and the body in Vietnamese culture: A qualitative exploration from a study examining the potentials of minimally invasive tissue sampling in Vietnam.SSM. Qualitative research in health · 2026Article
- Knowledge, acceptability, and attitudes regarding minimally invasive tissue sampling (MITS) techniques in Brazil.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Centering Africa as context and driver for Global Health Ethics: incompleteness, conviviality and the limits of Ubuntu: This article is based on the opening keynote address at the Oxford Global Health and Bioethics Conference, Oxford, June 2023.Wellcome open research · 2024Article
- The Gates Foundation's new AI initiative: attempting to leapfrog global health inequalities?BMJ global health · 2023Article
- The Persisting Value of Autopsies on Extremely Preterm Infants in the 21Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Global health practitioners and policymakers have become increasingly vocal about the complex challenges of identifying and quantifying the causes of death of the world's poorest people. To address this cause-of-death uncertainty and to minimise longstanding sensitivities about full autopsies, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have been one of the foremost advocates of minimally invasive autopsy technology (MIA). MIA involves using biopsy needles to collect samples from key organs and body fluids; as such, it is touted as potentially more acceptable and less invasive than a complete autopsy, which requires opening the cadaver. In addition, MIA is considered a good means of collecting accurate bodily samples and can provide the crucial information needed to address cause-of-death uncertainty. In this paper, we employ qualitative data to demonstrate that while MIA technology has been introduced as a solution to the enduring cause-of-death uncertainty, the development and deployment of technologies such as these always constitute interventions in complex social and moral worlds; in this respect, they are both the solutions to and the causes of new kinds of uncertainties. We deconstruct the ways in which those new dimensions of uncertainty operate at different levels in the global health context.
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.