ArticleJournal of clinical pathology2024
Accuracy and validity of determined cause of death and manner of death following forensic autopsy prosection.
Article in Journal of clinical pathology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of bladder wash for postmortem toxicological analysis: Comparison with urine in 50 forensic cases.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Machine learning to predict long-term cardiovascular death following myocardial infarction: incremental value of echocardiographic data.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- Coccidioidomycosis-Attributable Death in the United States: An Analysis of Cases Reported on Death Certificates, 2018-2023.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Survivorship following myocardial infarction in a contemporary Australian cohort: defining cardiac versus non-cardiac mortality.Internal medicine journal · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe purpose of this study is to evaluate the accuracy and validity of the determination of cause of death (COD) and manner of death (MOD) at the completion of the forensic autopsy prosection.
methodsWe analysed 952 autopsy cases conducted from 2019 to 2020 and compared every patient's COD, other significant contributing factors to death (OSC), and MOD after prosection to their COD, OSC and MOD after completion of the final autopsy report.
resultsWe found that 83% of cases (790 patients) did not have an unexpected change and 17% of cases (162 patients) exhibited a true change in their final diagnosis; the relationship between age and changes in COD and MOD was significant.
conclusionsOur findings indicate that in the majority of forensic autopsy cases, medical professionals can reasonably complete death certification after the autopsy prosection. In addition to improving the accuracy of COD and MOD, advances in this field will enhance timely decedent affairs management, timely investigations of crimes and timely closure to families who have lost loved ones. We recommend implementing combined interventional education and consultation with expert pathologists, and a well-followed structured method of death classification as the best course of practice.
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.