ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2024
Prediction model for anabolic androgenic steroid positivity in forensic autopsy cases - a new tool to the autopsy room.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interpol review of forensic drug chemistry, 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
- Microscopic cardiac pathology in forensic autopsies: a comparative study of anabolic androgenic steroid users and non-users.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Non-prescription use of anabolic androgenic steroids (AAS) is associated with an increased risk of premature death. However, these substances are seldom screened in connection with forensic cause-of-death investigation, unless the forensic pathologist specifically suspects use, often based on a positive AAS use history. Since AAS use is often concealed from others, this practice may lead to mistargeting of these analyses and significant underestimation of the true number of AAS positive cases undergoing forensic autopsy. Thus, more accurate diagnostic tools are needed to identify these cases. The main objective of this study was to determine, whether a multivariable model could predict AAS urine assay positivity in forensic autopsies. We analyzed retrospectively the autopsy reports of all cases that had been screened for AAS during forensic cause-of-death investigation between 2016-2019 at the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare forensic units (n = 46). Binary logistic regression with penalized maximum likelihood estimation was used to generate a nine-variable model combining circumferential and macroscopic autopsy-derived variables. The multivariable model predicted AAS assay positivity significantly better than a "conventional" model with anamnestic information about AAS use only (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.968 vs. 0.802, p = 0.005). Temporal validation was conducted in an independent sample of AAS screened cases between 2020-2022 (n = 31), where the superiority of the multivariable model was replicated (AUC = 0.856 vs. 0.644, p = 0.004). Based on the model, a calculator predicting AAS assay positivity is released as a decision-aiding tool for forensic pathologists working in the autopsy room.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.