Evaluation of Agonal Cardiac Function for Sudden Cardiac Death in Forensic Medicine with Postmortem Brain Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) and NT‐proBNP: A Meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is an unexpected death caused by a sudden loss of cardiac function, which is currently a global public health problem. Evaluation of the agonal cardiac function of the deceased is a quite important task for the diagnosis of SCD in forensic medicine. Brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal proBNP (NT-proBNP) are currently considered as significant biomarkers for the diagnosis of heart failure in both clinical and forensic practices. To investigate the postmortem evaluation roles of postmortem BNP and NT-proBNP levels for SCD, the present study meta-analyzed eight related studies from Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, China Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Data. Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was used to assess the quality of the included literature, and the meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3.5 software. Postmortem NT-proBNP in pericardial fluid showed higher levels in the SCD group than that of the non-SCD group with the weighted mean difference = 3665.74, 95% confidence interval: 1812.89-5518.59, and p = 0.0001. However, postmortem levels of BNP in pericardial fluid and NT-proBNP in serum revealed no statistical difference between SCD and non-SCD subjects. The results of present meta-analysis demonstrated that postmortem NT-proBNP in the pericardial fluid could be used as an ancillary indicator for evaluation of agonal cardiac function in forensic medicine.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".