ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2026
Cancer-related deaths among cases referred for forensic evaluation in Türkiye: a 5-year retrospective analysis.
Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCancer is a major global cause of mortality and holds particular importance in forensic cases regarding diagnosis, treatment processes, and determination of cause of death.
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed 163 cancer-related death cases referred for forensic evaluation to the First Specialized Board of the Council of Forensic Medicine of Türkiye between 2019 and 2023. Demographic, clinical, pathological, and forensic data were evaluated comprehensively.
resultsMost cases were male (79.1%), with a mean age of 57.3±18.5 years. The most common primary cancer was lung (30.7%). Diagnosis relied mainly on medical records (84%), while 12.3% were diagnosed solely by autopsy. Comorbidities were frequent (74.2%), the metastasis rate was high (46.0%), and deaths mostly occurred in hospitals (78.5%). Malpractice claims were present in 36.8%, particularly higher in interventional treatments.
conclusionAutopsy and histopathological examinations remain essential for diagnostic accuracy in forensic cancer-related deaths. Malpractice allegations were more frequent among cases undergoing surgery and chemotherapy/radiotherapy, although these findings reflect allegations rather than confirmed malpractice. A multidisciplinary approach integrating clinical, pathological, and forensic data is crucial for medicolegal evaluation.
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.