A model of evaluative opinion to encourage greater transparency and justification of interpretation in postmortem forensic toxicology

Author:

Maskell Peter D12ORCID,Elliott Simon34ORCID,Desharnais Brigitte5ORCID,Findell Martin6,Jackson Graham67

Affiliation:

1. Scottish Police Authority Forensic Services , Glasgow G69 8AE, UK

2. Forensic Medicine and Science, University of Glasgow , Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK

3. Elliott Forensic Consulting , Birmingham, UK

4. Department of Analytical, Environmental and Forensic Sciences, King’s College London , London SE1 9NH, UK

5. Department of Toxicology, Laboratoire de sciences judiciaires et de médecine légale , 1701 Parthenais Street, Montréal, QC H2K 3S7, Canada

6. Division of Psychology and Forensic Science, School of Applied Sciences, Abertay University , Dundee DD1 1HG, UK

7. Advance Forensic Science, St. Andrews , Scotland, UK

Abstract

Abstract Over the past decades, the calls to improve the robustness of interpretation in forensic science have increased in magnitude. Forensic toxicology has seen limited progress in this regard. In this work, we propose a transparent interpretive pathway for use in postmortem forensic toxicology cases. This process allows the selection of the interpretive methodology based on the amount of previous information that is available for the drug(s) in question. One approach is an assessment of various pharmacological and circumstantial considerations resulting in a toxicological significance score (TSS), which is particularly useful in situations where limited information about a drug is available. When there is a robust amount of case data available, then a probabilistic approach, through the evaluation of likelihood ratios by the forensic toxicologist and of prior probabilities by the fact finder, is utilized. This methodology provides a transparent means of making an interpretive decision on the role of a drug in the cause of death. This will allow the field of forensic toxicology to take a step forward in using best practice in evaluative reporting, a tool already used by many other forensic science disciplines.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Chemical Health and Safety,Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis,Toxicology,Environmental Chemistry,Analytical Chemistry

Reference38 articles.

1. ILAC-G19:06/2022 Modules in a Forensic Science Process;International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC)

2. Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward;National Academy of Sciences

3. Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods;President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST)

4. Development of Evaluative Opinions (FSR-C-118);Forensic Science Regulator,2021

5. Post-mortem clinical pharmacology;Ferner;British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology,2008

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. A fatal motor vehicle collision involving multiple novel psychoactive substances;Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal;2023-11-06

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3