But closure hasn't come for Mrs Maynard's grief-stricken relatives, who said the coroner’s inquest raised more questions than answers.

Mrs Maynard was said to have injected herself with the hormone on September 30, 2015, after becoming anxious at the prospect of testifying before a coronial inquiry after the death of prisoner Garnet Mickelo at Woodford Correctional Centre in 2012.

Her shattered family insist she would never have taken her own life by overdosing on insulin, no matter how stressed she was.

Her family told Fairfax Media her phone was wiped clean of its contents, the hotel room was cleaned and the bed stripped before the police officer in charge of investigating was on the scene.

Husband Micheal Maynard says there were several anomalies around her death, including the fact the 63-year-old clinical nurse would have known insulin was not an effective method of suicide.

“She had access to the prison medicine cabinet,” Mr Maynard said.

“There’s things out there that would have been 100 per cent successful in what she wanted to achieve.

“Why would she choose that method? You can end up with a coma, brain injury and not death - it would not guarantee success and she would have known that.”

During the Maynard inquest, the coroner heard evidence that the nurse believed someone was “gunning for her”.

Mrs Maynard survived three days in the intensive care unit of the Princess Alexandra Hospital, and at one stage, doctors told relatives if she survived, it would be with a brain injury.

But tragically, the nurse who spent over four decades caring for others, passed away three days later with her husband and her daughter, Catherine Richards, at her bedside.

Owing to her spiritual beliefs, her family say they find it hard to believe she would have wanted to take her own life, and in the manner suggested.

Her daughter, Catherine Richards, believes there were other things that were “off” around her mother’s supposed intentions.

“There’s a lot of things that were very odd that we took to the police and the investigator of Workplace Health and Safety at the time,” she said.

“While Mum was in ICU, the police returned her phone and laptop to us.

“She was not computer savvy, she was very old-school. Yet, her phone had her photos and all her history cleared from it, which she wouldn’t know how to do.

“My husband even put apps on her phone because she didn’t know how to do it.”

The family claims Mrs Maynard’s phone call log was wiped of incoming and outgoing calls, her text messages were deleted and all bar a handful of contacts were removed.

“It was the same with her laptop,” Mrs Richards said.

“Even the trash bin was empty and all her internet browsing cleared - all the cookies, everything.

“All it had was one folder which was called her ‘amended statement’ but when you clicked on the folder, it was empty.”

Mrs Richards told Fairfax Media she recalled the police telling her how peculiar it was when they handed the phone to her in the hospital.

When asked who could have wiped the devices, Mr Maynard said it was a mystery.

“Who deleted all the stuff? We don’t know," he said.

“Whether there was anything [untoward] from anyone who wanted to stop her giving evidence at the inquest, we just don’t know.

“Whether there was any threat made against her, or a threat against us and that’s why she didn’t want to give evidence at the inquest, we can only guess.

“It’s a maximum-security prison, you don’t know what goes on in there. It’s not a nice place.”

The coronial inquest into Mrs Maynard’s death heard that despite apparently checking into the Mon Komo Hotel in Redcliffe to take her own life, no drugs or drug paraphernalia were found either by paramedics who attended the scene, or by police who secured the hotel room.

The room was also cleaned and the bed stripped before the police officer in charge arrived.

Plain-clothes Senior Constable Edward Rogers was named as the initial investigator, but did not request CCTV from the hotel until July 2016, by which time it had been wiped.

In his findings, coroner John Lock said: "PCSC Rogers also noted there was a garbage room located on the western side of the elevator shaft, which was about 15 metres from the entrance to room 401."

"He stated it was a distinct possibility that Mrs Maynard used the garbage facilities or even a toilet to dispose of any drugs and drug paraphernalia," the coroner said.

"He conceded that he should have searched the garbage facilities and also the industrial bin in the basement area, which was connected to a garbage chute, and he should have obtained any CCTV footage."

Asked about the coroner's criticism, a spokeswoman for the Queensland Police Service, said: "At the end of the inquest the coroner found that ‘Ms Maynard acted on her own and was not assisted by anyone’.

"The Queensland Police Service, including the investigating officers, have noted the coroner’s findings in relation to the QPS investigation."

The family told Fairfax Media that conversations with some of Mrs Maynard’s colleagues led them to cast doubt on claims she was the last member of staff to attend the prisoner.

Mr Maynard said after his wife’s death, he battled for three months to obtain her unpaid wages and entitlements from employer Metro North Hospital and Health Service, and did not receive a condolence card, phone call or any messages of support from health bosses.

To add to the family’s grief, a WorkCover Dependency Claim for Mrs Maynard’s workplace-related stress was also rejected by WorkCover Queensland, before the inquest had concluded.

The body stated it was “not satisfied” that any work-related psychiatric condition she suffered was a major contributing factor to her suicide.

WorkCover also advised the family her death was an intentional act, her injury was self-inflicted and therefore did not meet the criteria for compensation.

“My wife’s death was under an active coronial investigation at the time,” Mr Maynard said.

“But, I believe the Workers’ Compensation Regulator should have held over a decision on the claim until completion of the coronial investigation.

“I believe WorkCover were aware that my wife’s death was proceeding to an inquest, and that this expedited their decision to reject the claim before the inquest could be completed.”

Mrs Maynard was also compelled to give evidence at the inquest, a standard mandatory requirement for any death in custody.

“The stress of having to give evidence at an inquest was well-documented at Marcia’s inquest," Mr Maynard said.

“[This happened] as a consequence of her employment as a nurse at the prison, and contradicts WorkCover’s conclusion that it was separate to her employment and the workplace.

“WorkCover’s statement that her injury was self-inflicted and therefore not compensatable, given that her name and nursing skills were cleared at the inquest so the stress was unwarranted, is completely insensitive and offensive to the family.

“At the time of her death, the inquest hadn’t been undertaken, so [how could] my wife know her good name and nursing skills had been cleared?”

Fairfax Media put nine questions to Industrial Relations Minister Grace Grace to clarify why WorkCover rejected the claim before the inquest concluded, but no response was received.

She was asked to explain if WorkCover’s approach was normal practice or whether it was a tactic designed to avoid liability on the part of the employer, and was asked to clarify how many stress-related WorkCover claims had been submitted by nurses and how many had been approved.

Ms Grace also declined to say who sat on the WorkCover regulator body, or reveal who made the decision to confirm the claim had been rejected.

While it is understood the minister has no legal powers to review or overturn the regulator’s decision, a senior source confirmed that a letter of complaint received from Mr Maynard was being reviewed.

Fairfax Media asked why, prior to Mrs Maynard’s death, the coroner’s original list of nursing staff witnesses was confined to just one nurse - Mrs Maynard - to give evidence at the prisoner’s inquest.

When asked to clarify why the coroner later heard evidence from three nursing staff - Dean Izzard, Tina Evans and Martha Pitt - a spokeswoman said: “A coronial inquest calls witnesses to give oral evidence who are determined as being able to provide information which will be of the most relevance to assist the coroner to make findings as required under the Coroners Act 2003.

“Parties granted leave to appear at an inquest are able to make submissions in response to the proposed list of witnesses if they consider other witnesses should be called to give oral evidence.”

A spokeswoman for Metro North HHS would not comment on claims the family had to fight to obtain Mrs Maynard’s salary and did not receive support after her death.

Instead, the spokeswoman said Metro North offered its “deepest and sincerest condolences” to Mrs Maynard’s family.

“This is a tragic loss for all who knew her,” it said.

“Our staff are incredibly busy caring for others in their time of need, and it is essential that we look after them as well. Their wellbeing is extremely important.”

It added that the coroner made no recommendations or adverse findings for Metro North HHS, and they encouraged staff who needed support to “talk to family, friends, colleagues or through formal structures such as employee assistance.”

Crisis support can be found at Lifeline: (13 11 14 and lifeline.org.au), the Suicide Call Back Service (1300 659 467 and suicidecallbackservice.org.au) and beyondblue (1300 22 4636 and beyondblue.org.au)