• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

尸检、临床诊断与死亡证明诊断的比较,特别涉及肺癌。已发表数据综述。

Comparison of autopsy, clinical and death certificate diagnosis with particular reference to lung cancer. A review of the published data.

作者信息

Lee P N

机构信息

P. N. Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd., Sutton, Surrey, UK.

出版信息

APMIS Suppl. 1994;45:1-42.

PMID:7811528
Abstract

Some clinicians and some epidemiologists appear to be under the illusion that techniques available for the diagnosis of internal diseases such as lung cancer have improved so much that autopsies are not necessary on the bodies of most people who die. Partly for this reason, partly for economic reasons and partly because clinicians fear litigation if autopsy shows that they treated patients for the wrong disease, autopsy rates have been falling in most developed countries. The object of the present review was to ascertain how much reliance can reasonably be put on clinical diagnoses made and death certificates completed in the absence of autopsy data. In the case of lung cancer, high rates of false positive and false negative diagnoses are universally prevalent, with biases influencing these rates, so that smokers are more likely to be appropriately investigated for lung cancer, and false negatives are commoner in non-smokers. All investigators who have compared clinical-based and autopsy-based death certificates have concluded that higher autopsy rates are necessary and the results of one study suggest that a high autopsy rate in a hospital leads to improvements in the accuracy of clinical diagnoses. The extent to which diagnoses on death certificates that are dependent solely on clinical data are seriously inaccurate for internal diseases such as lung cancer should engender caution in all who use mortality data to guide public health policies and to identify and quantify environmental risks to healths.

摘要

一些临床医生和流行病学家似乎误以为,诸如肺癌等内科疾病的诊断技术已经有了很大改进,以至于对大多数死亡者的尸体进行尸检已无必要。部分出于这个原因,部分出于经济原因,部分还因为临床医生担心尸检显示他们误诊了病人而引发诉讼,在大多数发达国家,尸检率一直在下降。本综述的目的是确定在没有尸检数据的情况下,临床诊断和填写的死亡证明能在多大程度上得到合理信赖。就肺癌而言,假阳性和假阴性诊断的高发生率普遍存在,且存在影响这些发生率的偏差,因此吸烟者更有可能接受适当的肺癌检查,而非吸烟者的假阴性更为常见。所有比较基于临床的死亡证明和基于尸检的死亡证明的研究者都得出结论,有必要提高尸检率,一项研究结果表明,医院的高尸检率会提高临床诊断的准确性。对于诸如肺癌等内科疾病,仅依赖临床数据的死亡证明诊断严重不准确的程度,应让所有利用死亡率数据来指导公共卫生政策以及识别和量化健康环境风险的人保持谨慎。

相似文献

1
Comparison of autopsy, clinical and death certificate diagnosis with particular reference to lung cancer. A review of the published data.尸检、临床诊断与死亡证明诊断的比较,特别涉及肺癌。已发表数据综述。
APMIS Suppl. 1994;45:1-42.
2
Misdiagnosis of lung cancer in a 2000 consecutive autopsy study in Budapest.布达佩斯一项连续2000例尸检研究中肺癌的误诊情况。
Gen Diagn Pathol. 1996 Mar;141(3-4):169-78.
3
Correlation of clinical diagnosis with autopsy findings.临床诊断与尸检结果的相关性。
IARC Sci Publ. 1991(112):99-108.
4
"Just Another Statistic".“只是又一个统计数字”
Oncologist. 1998;3(3):III-IV.
5
Comparison between diagnoses on death certificates and autopsy reports in Trieste: gynaecological cancers.的里雅斯特死亡证明诊断与尸检报告的比较:妇科癌症
IARC Sci Publ. 1991(112):63-71.
6
[The usefulness of death certificates in epidemiological studies].[死亡证明在流行病学研究中的用途]
Offentl Gesundheitswes. 1991 Dec;53(12):765-75.
7
Accuracy of clinical diagnosis of lung cancer in Budapest in an institute specializing in chest diseases.布达佩斯一家胸科疾病专科医院对肺癌的临床诊断准确性。
Pathol Res Pract. 2000;196(11):761-6. doi: 10.1016/S0344-0338(00)80108-9.
8
Comparison of diagnoses of cancers of the respiratory system on death certificates and at autopsy.死亡证明与尸检中呼吸系统癌症诊断情况的比较。
IARC Sci Publ. 1991(112):55-62.
9
Discrepancies in initial death certificate diagnoses in sudden unexpected out-of-hospital deaths: the role of cardiovascular autopsy.院外突发意外死亡初始死亡证明诊断中的差异:心血管尸检的作用
Cardiovasc Pathol. 2008 May-Jun;17(3):178-82. doi: 10.1016/j.carpath.2007.07.010. Epub 2007 Oct 24.
10
Discrepancies between clinical and autopsy diagnosis and the value of post mortem histology; a meta-analysis and review.临床诊断与尸检诊断之间的差异以及尸检组织学的价值;一项荟萃分析与综述
Histopathology. 2005 Dec;47(6):551-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2005.02243.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Classification of death causes after transplantation (CLASS): Evaluation of methodology and initial results.移植后死亡原因分类(CLASS):方法学评估及初步结果
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Jul;97(29):e11564. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011564.
2
Accuracy of cause of death data routinely recorded in a population-based cancer registry: impact on cause-specific survival and validation using the Geneva Cancer Registry.基于人群的癌症登记处常规记录的死亡原因数据的准确性:对特定病因生存率的影响以及使用日内瓦癌症登记处进行的验证
BMC Cancer. 2013 Dec 27;13:609. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-609.
3
Indirectly estimated absolute lung cancer mortality rates by smoking status and histological type based on a systematic review.
基于系统评价的吸烟状况和组织学类型间接估计的肺癌死亡率。
BMC Cancer. 2013 Apr 9;13:189. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-189.
4
Causes of death certification of adults: an exploratory cross-sectional study at a university hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.成人死亡原因认证:沙特阿拉伯利雅得一家大学医院的探索性横断面研究。
Ann Saudi Med. 2012 Nov-Dec;32(6):615-22. doi: 10.5144/0256-4947.2012.615.
5
Evaluation of cause of deaths' validity using outcome measures from a prospective, population based cohort study in Tehran, Iran.使用伊朗德黑兰一项前瞻性、基于人群的队列研究的结局指标评估死因的有效性。
PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e31427. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031427. Epub 2012 Feb 15.
6
Systematic review of the epidemiological evidence comparing lung cancer risk in smokers of mentholated and unmentholated cigarettes.系统综述比较薄荷醇和非薄荷醇卷烟吸烟者肺癌风险的流行病学证据。
BMC Pulm Med. 2011 Apr 18;11:18. doi: 10.1186/1471-2466-11-18.
7
The medical autopsy: past, present, and dubious future.医学尸检:过去、现在与不确定的未来。
Mo Med. 2010 Mar-Apr;107(2):94-100.
8
Relation between exposure to asbestos and smoking jointly and the risk of lung cancer.石棉暴露与吸烟共同作用与肺癌风险之间的关系。
Occup Environ Med. 2001 Mar;58(3):145-53. doi: 10.1136/oem.58.3.145.