Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41573263›Full record

ReviewBJR open2026

Medico-legal considerations in post-mortem imaging data: governance, ethics, and evidential use.

Natasha Davendralingam, Susan C Shelmerdine, Amy-Lee Brookes, Imogen Jones

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BJR open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Natasha DavendralingamDepartment of Radiology, Tameside & Glossop NHS Foundation Trust, Ashton-under-Lyne OL6 9RW, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1026-1119
Susan C ShelmerdineAnubix Ltd., London HP14 3FE, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6642-9967
Amy-Lee BrookesRoyal Preston Hospital, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, Lancashire PR2 9HT, United Kingdom.
Imogen JonesSchool of Law, The Liberty Building University of Leeds, Leeds, West Yorkshire LS2 9JT, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Post-mortem imaging, in particular CT (PMCT), is increasingly used for death investigation in England and Wales, yet unlike "live" clinical imaging, this data falls outside traditional health-record legislation, creating uncertainty around data ownership, access rights, and disclosure obligations. This review examines the current data governance landscape surrounding post-mortem imaging data, identifying critical gaps requiring national guidance. We explore fundamental questions of data control between coroners and commercial service providers, noting how the absence of standardized frameworks has resulted in substantial regional variation in practice. Key challenges include inconsistent approaches to data storage, whether on clinical or dedicated PACS systems, varying data-retention periods, and disparate policies for third-party access by researchers, legal teams, and bereaved families. The evolving role of radiologists as expert witnesses in coronial and criminal proceedings presents additional complexities, particularly regarding who is best placed to explain imaging findings in court. We propose recommendations including national standards for data governance, standardized contractual frameworks clarifying data-controller relationships, protocols for secure storage and access controls, and defined competencies for radiologists presenting evidence in legal settings. Establishing robust governance foundations for post-mortem imaging data is essential to ensure this technology serves the public interest effectively, while maintaining legal defensibility and ethical integrity.

Indexed as

autopsycomputed tomographydata privacydata protectionmedicolegalpost-mortemradiology

Identifiers

PMID41573263
PMCPMC12820887

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.