ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2025
The Medical Determination of Fitness for Detention in Police Custody.
Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Germany, police custody is used to prevent danger. An arrested person's medical fitness for detention must be assessed by a physician if it is in doubt. The frequency of such examinations among arrested persons in Germany ranges from 5.5% to 66.0%. There are currently no binding guidelines for the assessment of fitness for detention.
methodsCurrent police custody regulations across Germany were obtained from the internet and from the interior ministries of the German federal states. Epidemiological features and risk profiles were determined from relevant publications retrieved by a selective search and from the authors' own current data. Practical recommendations were derived from this information.
resultsRegulations concerning police custody vary widely across German states. The main indications for medical assessment are intoxication (36.8-65.7%) and withdrawal syndromes (14.4-24.7%). Medical assessment usually results in a determination of unrestricted fitness for detention (32.5-64.6%) or of restricted fitness subject to certain conditions (16.7-75.4%). Mental illness (21.7-25.0%) is a common reason for being unfit for detention.
conclusionIn Germany, no particular individual or body is specified by law as being responsible or qualified for assessing fitness for detention. When such an assessment is to be made, the state regulations should be known, and a state-specific assessment form and certificate of fitness for detention should be developed if the legal basis is inadequate. A standard operating procedure (SOP) should be created for use in hospitals as well. It should be stated in the certificate whether the person in question is fully fit for detention, fit for detention with restrictions, or unfit for detention.
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.