ArticleForensic toxicology2025
Non-consensual administration of mifepristone for hidden abortion: a rare case of drug-facilitated crime.
Article in Forensic toxicology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Insights from a six-year hair drug analysis compendium in drug-facilitated crimes involving vulnerable population cases.Journal of forensic sciences · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn this paper, the authors report a hidden administration of mifepristone, an antiprogestogen used in abortion procedure, by the boyfriend of a pregnant woman. After drinking an iced tea, the woman experienced pelvic cramps and then expulsed products of conception. Due to conflicts in the couple, she suspected a surreptitious administration of an abortion medicine and reported the fact to the police.
methodsUrine was collected 3 days after the event, while a strand of head hair was collected 1 month later. Urine and hair samples were tested for mifepristone using a liquid chromatography system coupled to tandem mass spectrometry. The limits of detection and quantification were 0.05 and 0.1 ng/mL for urine and 0.5 and 1 pg/mg for hair, respectively.
resultsUrine and the hair segment corresponding to the period of the event were positive for mifepristone at 0.4 ng/mL and 1.4 pg/mg, respectively.
conclusionThe presence of mifepristone in both biological specimens demonstrates that the woman was exposed to the drug at the period of the event. The findings of this case make a valuable contribution to the literature, addressing an important gap regarding the concentrations found in biological matrices. There is a few data available in the literature, and these results help to expand knowledge on the subject.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40252152What 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.