Sims, N.Langlois, N.Byard, R.2013-08-202013-08-202013Journal of Clinical Forensic and Legal Medicine: an international journal of forensic and legal medicine, 2013; 20(5):402-4031752-928X1878-7487http://hdl.handle.net/2440/79212Peer review in forensic pathology has been a long time in evolution but may provide a very useful mechanism to check for, and to correct, errors, in addition to establishing an important educative vehicle for pathologists. A process is reported that has been established at our institution that involves both informal peer review in the mortuary and formal auditing of a set number of cases. Every autopsy case is discussed at a daily meeting of pathologists before a provisional cause of death is released. In addition, one in ten cases including all homicides, deaths in custody, suspicious and paediatric cases, and randomly selected additional cases undergo formal auditing by a second pathologist. Finally, administrative staff check the completed report. This formalized process, in a jurisdiction where autopsies are usually performed by only one pathologist, has been extremely useful in standardizing autopsy reports and in enabling pathologists to discuss cases and associated issues on a regular basis.en© 2013 Elsevier Ltd and Faculty of Forensic and Legal MedicinePeer reviewForensic pathologyAutopsyAuditJournal article002013036110.1016/j.jflm.2013.02.0100003212322000072-s2.0-8487890009018899Langlois, N. [0000-0001-9176-8522]Byard, R. [0000-0002-0524-5942]