ArticleHeart rhythm O22025
Trends and differences in the rates of autopsy in the United States, 2003 to 2020: A nationwide analysis.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 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
- Incident versus prevalent progressive supranuclear palsy: analyses of U.S. Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers data indicate clinical and neuropathological features of a relatively common and underrecognized tauopathy in the aging brain.Acta neuropathologica · 2026Article
- Contacting next-of-kin for research consent following medico-legal autopsy: a practice-based study from Denmark.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2026Article
- Article
- An Australian brain bank and the future of alcohol and major neuropsychiatric disorders research.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Autopsy, the gold standard for determining the cause of death, is declining globally. Significant differences exist between clinical diagnoses and those revealed at autopsy. Evidence of disparities in autopsy rates between different patient groups has previously been reported. Objective: To describe contemporary trends and disparities in autopsy rates according to sex, race, and urbanization, with particular attention to patients who have died because of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Methods: We accessed the Center for Disease Control Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiological Research "Underlying Cause of Death" dataset for 2003 to 2020, to assess trends in autopsy rates in all-comers and for different subgroups stratified by sex, race, and degree of urbanization. Further primary and subgroup analysis was performed independently by the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision cause of death criteria by chapter, subchapter, and specific diseases of interest. Linear regression was used to assess trends over time, with a significant coefficient considered evidence of temporal trend. Results: Annual autopsy rates decreased across the time period in all-comers, with an average autopsy rate of 3.66% ( Conclusion: Autopsy is decreasing in the United States; however, trends differ depending on patient factors (sex, ethnicity), social factors (degree of urbanization), and disease factors.
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.