SynthesisInternational journal of legal medicine2025
A systematic review on the use of C-reactive protein in autopsy practice.
Synthesis in International journal of legal medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Postmortem analysis of C-reactive protein (CRP) in autopsies has been extensively researched for its potential utility. This analysis could aid forensic pathologists in screening for and investigating the potential infectious or inflammatory causes of death, thereby guiding appropriate autopsy procedures. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of postmortem CRP analysis in autopsy settings, a thorough electronic literature search was conducted across databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Two independent reviewers screened eligible studies, followed by a methodological quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 checklist. Utilising a random-effects model, hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curve analysis and bivariate model meta-analysis were performed to evaluate heterogeneity across studies. Of the 1286 studies initially identified, nine met the eligibility criteria for the final analysis. The pooled sensitivity of postmortem CRP analysis was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.76, 0.98), with a pooled specificity of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.71, 0.87). The prevalence across studies ranged from 0.23 to 0.68, with a median of 0.5. Moderate variability was observed in the heterogeneity assessment across the primary studies. In summary, the study findings indicate that postmortem serum CRP analysis demonstrates high diagnostic accuracy with moderate heterogeneity. Additionally, postmortem CRP testing may be useful as a screening tool in autopsy practice to rule out the likelihood of sepsis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39302346What 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.