ArticleForensic science, medicine, and pathology2022
A comparative autopsy study of the injury distribution and severity between suicidal and accidental high falls.
Article in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative analysis of body parameters for fracture and post-healing patient using a non-invasive bioimpedance device.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Fatal Free Falls: A Clinical and Forensic Analysis of Skeletal Injury Patterns Using PMCT and Autopsy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Fracture Patterns in Fatal Free Falls: A Systematic Review of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Risk Factors and the Role of Postmortem CT.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Do the management and functional outcomes of the surgically treated spinal fractures change in suicidal jumpers?European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024Article
- Injury distribution and severity in suicidal versus accidental fall from heights: need for a multifactorial consideration.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Falls are the second cause of accidental deaths worldwide. Falls from height are also a common method of suicide. The aim of this study is to compare the characteristics of the victims, the circumstances of the fall and the severity and distribution of the injuries reported in an autopsy case series of falls from height. This study is a retrospective analysis of consecutive autopsy cases of suicidal and accidental falls from height which were investigated in the Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens during the period 2011-2019. The recorded variables included demographic data of the victim, height of fall, length of hospital stay, toxicological results, the existence and location of injuries and Injury Severity Score (ISS). Victims of suicidal falls were younger (55.53 vs. 62.98, p = 0.001), they fell from higher heights (12.35 vs. 5.18 m, p < 0.001), and they sustained more severe injuries compared with victims of accidental falls (ISS 51.01 vs. 40.88, p < 0.001). Injuries in the thorax, abdomen, pelvis, upper and lower extremities were more frequently observed after a suicidal fall (93.6% vs. 67.3%, 72.1% vs. 21.4%, 72.1% vs. 27.6%, 42.9% vs. 15.3%, 45.7% vs. 13.3%, respectively-p < 0.001), probably due to the higher height of fall. Our study outlines the differences in the profile of the victims and in the severity of injuries caused by falls from height depending on the intention of the victim to fall. However, a distinctive injury pattern in victims of suicidal falls was not demonstrated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35771377What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.