The literature was scoped to help place mass spectrometric (MS) platforms in the spotlight of the life sciences, as a tool of OMICS and OMICS 2.0 technologies. Moreover, today’s appliances are so handy, that they literally place a whole lab on a single chip. Methods of OMICS (and the most recently developed term OMICS 2.0) are tackled, having in mind their aptness for educational purposes, as well as their feasibility. This same topic was highlighted in many reviews that have been periodically published. The author’s initial interest was the forensic application of MS, but since these interests changed, terms such as “biosensors” were also examined, so the review included means of discovery of efficient biomarkers and clinical therapeutic targets. Aside from simply reviewing the research status and the future perspectives, this article tackles terms such as Society 5.0 and OMICS 2.0. However, within the framework of this review, physical chemistry, bioinformatics, or specific software solutions were not specifically studied. Since the topic of generating permanent collections of digital content for retrospective analysis was also reviewed, the need for loads of data – cloud storage was discussed in the context of MS. These large quantities of data are easier to operate with if generated by MS, rather than by any other commercially available assay. In this manner, the review has strengthened an in-depth understanding of the applications of MS.

Premortem clinical diagnoses and postmortem autopsy findings do not match throughout history. These clinicopathological discrepancies are expected to be raised during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic due to increased pressure on healthcare. At the same time, autopsies and clinicopathological discrepancies accurately display the quality of the healthcare system. To assess that, we examined the relevant works of literature according to the PRISMA-based protocol. As discrepancy rate changes in the correlation to the length of stay in the hospital, we also checked whether studies with patients from the intensive care unit (ICU) differed in discrepancies significantly. We found overall risk differences pretty much alike in "pre-COVID" and "during the pandemic" groups of studies. Based on that, we concluded that healthcare quality did not drop significantly during the pandemic. Be it as it may, the pandemic exposed some shortcomings in mortem healthcare regarding consensus to the autopsy, organ retention, burial, and the postponed burial or the digitalization of post mortem healthcare. All of these issues should be addressed in the future.