ReviewEmerging microbes & infections2026
Autopsy practices for high-consequence infectious diseases: global guidelines, alternatives, and the BSL-4 gap.
Review in Emerging microbes & infections, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Autopsies play a critical role in elucidating the pathogenesis of emerging infectious diseases, particularly in cases involving high-consequence pathogens such as viral haemorrhagic fevers (VHFs). While biosafety concerns have restricted post-mortem examinations in such contexts, the COVID-19 pandemic has renewed interest in autopsy-based research and highlighted both the potential and the gaps in current biosafety protocols. This narrative review outlines autopsy practices in the context of high-consequence infectious diseases (HCIDs) with a focus on VHFs, summarizes reported autopsy cases, explores alternative post-mortem methods, and examines the evolution of legal and institutional frameworks in response to the pandemic. A comparison of official international guidelines shows that while detailed autopsy protocols have been published for pathogens requiring BSL-3 containment - particularly in the United States (US) and United Kingdom (UK) - no official procedural guidance seems to be available for performing autopsies under BSL-4 conditions. Instead, current recommendations at this level are limited to post-mortem handling and disposal of the deceased. This regulatory and procedural gap underscores the urgent need for harmonized, high-containment autopsy protocols that balance biosafety with scientific value. Developing such frameworks will be essential to improve outbreak preparedness and enable evidence-based responses to future pandemics globally. Accordingly, we propose a structured, system-based approach to BSL-4 autopsy practice as a foundation for discussion and future guideline development.
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.