Suffocation Using Plastic Bags: A Retrospective Study of Suicides in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One hundred and ten cases of suicidal suffocation using a plastic bag were identified in the files of the Office of the Chief Coroner of Ontario, Canada, between 1993 and 1997. The records were reviewed to determine the demographic characteristics of this group compared with all cases of suicide in Ontario, the scene information, autopsy findings and toxicology results. Most suicides occurred in people over 60 years of age, with older women making up a considerable proportion of cases as compared with other methods of suicide. In 40% of cases the deceased was suffering from a serious illness. Autopsy findings were usually minimal, with facial, conjunctival and visceral petechiae present in a minority of cases. One or more drugs were detected in the blood in 92.6% of cases where toxicologic testing was performed. Benzodiazepines, diphenhydramine and antidepressants were the most common drugs found, with diphenhydramine the most common drug present at an elevated concentration. Information at the scene from "right to die" societies was uncommon. One quarter of decedents took additional measures, besides the use of drugs or alcohol, to ensure the rapidity, certainty or comfort of their death. This study further elucidates the characteristics of this uncommon method of suicide. It emphasizes additional scene findings, such as the presence of dust masks, physical restraints and modification of the plastic bag that may be of use to death investigators in determining the correct manner of death.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".