ReviewSAGE open medicine2023
Usefulness of virtual autopsy in diagnosing pathologies in the paediatric population: A systematic review.
Review in SAGE open medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The value of magnetic resonance imaging in forensic investigation: a mapping review.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Review
- Diagnostic accuracy of unenhanced post-mortem CT and MRI compared to the non-forensic clinical autopsy: a prospective blinded study.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Advancements in pathology: Digital transformation, precision medicine, and beyond.Journal of pathology informatics · 2025Review
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
Objective: Virtual autopsy is a non-invasive/minimally invasive method for conducting an autopsy, with the assistance of imaging techniques. We aim to review the benefits of virtual autopsy in detecting pathologies in the paediatric population. Method: The procedure adhered to Institute of Medicine and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Seven databases including MEDLINE and SCOPUS were searched for articles published 2010-2020 worldwide in English. A narrative synthesis of the findings of included studies was carried out to discuss and summarize the results of the review. Results: From 686 studies on paediatric deaths, 23 met selection/quality criteria. Virtual autopsy was better than conventional autopsy in detecting skeletal lesions and bullet trajectory, thus a crucial tool in the investigation of traumatic and firearm deaths. Virtual autopsy was superior to conventional autopsy in identifying the point of bleeding in postoperative deaths and objectively quantifying air/fluid in body cavities. Virtual autopsy was a useful adjunct for detecting pulmonary thrombo-embolism, foreign body aspiration, drowning and metastatic malignancies. The use of non-contrast imaging in investigating natural paediatric deaths did not offer more information than conventional autopsy. Misinterpretation of normal post-mortem changes as pathological findings was another disadvantage of virtual autopsy leading to erroneous conclusions. But accuracy may be improved with contrast enhancement and post-mortem magnetic resonance imaging. Conclusion: Virtual autopsy is a crucial tool in the investigation of traumatic and firearm deaths in the paediatric population. Virtual autopsy will be useful as an adjunct to conventional autopsy in asphyxial deaths, stillbirths and decomposed bodies. Virtual autopsy has limited value in differentiating antemortem and post-mortem changes with the added risk of misinterpretations, therefore should be used with caution in natural deaths.
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.