ArticleJournal of substance use2014
Concordance of self-reported drug use and saliva drug tests in a sample of emergency department patients.
Article in Journal of substance use, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Self-report and urine drug screen concordance among women with co-occurring PTSD and substance use disorders participating in a clinical trial: Impact of drug type and participant characteristics.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2023Trial
- Sexual HIV risk behavior outcomes of brief interventions for drug use in an inner-city emergency department: Secondary outcomes from a randomized controlled trial.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2018Trial
- Considering unintentional exposure when testing for cocaine use via oral fluid testing.Forensic science international · 2026Article
- What is the prevalence of drug use in the general population? Simulating underreported and unknown use for more accurate national estimates.Annals of epidemiology · 2022Article
- Marijuana use in U.S. teen drivers: a comparison of a road-side survey of reported use and fluid tests for tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).Injury epidemiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to assess the concordance of self-reports of cannabis, cocaine and amphetamines, and the utility of these, with a saliva point of collection drug test, the DrugWipe 5+, in an emergency department (ED) setting.
methodsA random sample of people admitted to either of two emergency departments at hospitals in British Columbia, Canada were asked to participate in an interview on their substance use and provide a saliva test for detection of drugs. ANALYSES: Concordance of self-reports and drug tests were calculated. Prior DrugWipe 5+ sensitivity and specificity estimates were compared against a gold standard of mass spectrometry and chromatography (MS/GC). This was used as a basis to assess the truthfulness of self-reports for each drug.
resultsOf the 1584 patients approached 1190 agreed to participate, a response rate of 75.1%. For cannabis, among those who acknowledged use only 21.1% had a positive test and 2.1% of those who reported no use had a positive test. For cocaine and amphetamines respectively, 50.0% and 57.1% tested positive among those reporting use, while 2.1% and 1.3%, respectively reported no use and tested positive. Self-reports of cannabis and amphetamines use appear more truthful than self-reports of cocaine use.
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.