SynthesisInternational journal of legal medicine2026
Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of postmortem computed tomography and traditional autopsy in fracture detection: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of legal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically evaluate the diagnostic performance of postmortem computed tomography (PMCT) versus traditional autopsy in the detection of fracture.
methodsThe database of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science were searched to screen the studies comparing PMCT and autopsy in fracture detection from 1 January 1994 to 23 January 2025. Relevant data was extracted for calculating sensitivity and specificity. The QUADAS-2 tool was used for bias assessment and a random effects model was used for meta-analysis.
resultsA total of 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis containing 1757 fracture cases, covering 7 anatomical sites. All deceased were scanned on multi-slice scanners with comparable parameters. Images were evaluated by radiologists or pathologists. The meta-analysis found that the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.87 (95% CI: 0.85-0.89) and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.97-0.98) for PMCT, respectively. Compared to conventional autopsy, positive likelihood ratio (PLR) was 19.74 (95% CI: 12.66-30.79), negative likelihood ratio (NLR) was 0.15 (95% CI: 0.11-0.20), and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.97.
conclusionBy Demonstrating high diagnostic efficacy for fracture detection, PMCT provides the valuable adjunctive support to traditional autopsy. It can improve the precision and efficiency of forensic examination.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41606263What 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.