MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409404424 · doi:10.3389/fradi.2025.1565012

The evolution of postmortem investigation: a historical perspective on autopsy's decline and imaging's role in its revival

2025· article· en· W4409404424 on OpenAlexaff
Nadia Solomon, Dominic Gascho, Natalie L. Adolphi, Laura Filograna, Harold Sanchez, James R. Gill, Jamie Elifritz

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Radiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutopsy Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsOffice of the Chief Medical Examiner
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutopsyMedicinePublic healthEconomic shortageWorkforceCause of deathHealth carePathologyIntensive care medicinePolitical scienceLawGovernment (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autopsy is generally regarded as the gold standard for cause of death determination, the most accurate contributor to mortality data. Despite this, autopsy rates have substantially declined, and death certificates are more frequently completed by clinicians. Substantial discrepancies between clinician-presumed and autopsy-determined cause of death impact quality control in hospitals, accuracy of mortality data, and, subsequently, the applicability and effectiveness of public health efforts. This problem is compounded by wavering support for the practice of autopsy by accrediting bodies and academic bodies governing pathology specialty training. In forensic settings, critical workforce shortages combined with increased workloads further threaten sustainability of the practice. Postmortem imaging (PMI) can help mitigate these ongoing problems. Postmortem computed tomography can help clarify manner and cause of death in a variety of situations and has undeniable advantages, including cost reduction, the potential to review data, expedient reporting, archived unaltered enduring evidence (available for expert opinion, further review, demonstrative aids, and education), and (when feasible) adherence to cultural and religious objections to autopsy. Integration of radiology and pathology is driving a transformative shift in medicolegal death investigations, enabling innovative approaches that enhance diagnostic accuracy, expedite results, and improve public health outcomes. This synergy addresses declining autopsy rates, the forensic pathologist shortage, and the need for efficient diagnostic tools. By combining advanced imaging techniques with traditional pathology, this collaboration elevates the quality of examinations and advances public health, vital statistics, and compassionate care, positioning radiology and pathology as pivotal partners in shaping the future of death investigations.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.034
Scholarly communication0.0070.013
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0080.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in RadiologySame topicAutopsy Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207