ArticleForensic science international. Synergy2025
Abbreviated injury scale-guided assessment of traumatic deaths: postmortem CT versus autopsy.
Article in Forensic science international. Synergy, 2025. 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.
- Fatal Injuries Caused by Falling Trees: Correlation Between Postmortem Computed Tomography and Forensic Autopsy Findings in Eight Cases.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- DRDarkNet: a hybrid deep feature engineering model for accurate autopsy image classification.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Comment on "Abbreviated injury scale-guided assessment of traumatic deaths: postmortem CT versus autopsy".Forensic science international. Synergy · 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
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic agreement between postmortem computed tomography (PMCT) and conventional autopsy in assessing injury severity and determining the cause of death using the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 65 trauma-related fatalities that underwent both PMCT and autopsy. Injuries were classified by anatomical region and scored using AIS. Severity was categorized as minor (AIS 0-3) or major (AIS 4-6). The cause of death was determined based on either expert opinion or the highest AIS score per region. Agreement between PMCT and autopsy was analyzed using kappa statistics, correlation coefficients, and chi-square tests. Results: Moderate agreement in AIS scoring was observed across most anatomical regions (36 %-52 %). Agreement improved substantially when classifying injuries as minor or major (78 %-86 %). The overall concordance for determining the cause of death was 33.85 % using expert opinion (κ = 0.23) and 55.38 % using AIS scoring (κ = 0.41). PMCT showed high sensitivity in detecting skeletal injuries but was limited in identifying soft tissue damage and vascular lesions, particularly in the abdomen and external surface regions. Conclusion: PMCT demonstrates substantial agreement with autopsy in classifying injury severity, especially when guided by AIS scoring. While PMCT alone may not replace autopsy in all cases, its utility is enhanced through standardized injury scoring. PMCT may serve as a reliable adjunct or alternative in select forensic contexts, particularly where autopsy is declined or unavailable.
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.