Autoerotic Deaths in the Literature from 1954 to 2004: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autoerotic death by hanging or ligature is a method of autoeroticism well known by forensic pathologists. In order to analyze autoerotic deaths of nonclassic hanging or ligature type, this paper reviews all published cases of autoerotic deaths from 1954 to 2004, with the exclusion of homicide cases or cases in which the autoerotic activity was not solitary. These articles were obtained through a systematic Medline database search. A total of 408 cases of such deaths has been reported in 57 articles. For each case, the following characteristics are presented here: sex, age, race, method of autoerotic activity, cause of death, and location where the body was found. Autoerotic death practioners were predominantly Caucasian males. Victims were aged from 9 to 77 years and were mainly found in various indoor locations. Most cases were asphyxia by hanging, ligature, plastic bags, chemical substances, or a mixture of these. Still, atypical methods of autoerotic activity leading to death accounted for about 10.3% of cases in the literature and are classified here into five broad categories: electrocution (3.7%), overdressing/body wrapping (1.5%), foreign body insertion (1.2%), atypical asphyxia method (2.9%), and miscellaneous (1.0%). All these atypical methods are further discussed individually.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".