Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31840414›Full record

ArticleDrug testing and analysis2020

Should NPS be included in workplace drug testing?

Alberto Salomone, Joseph J Palamar, Marco Vincenti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug testing and analysis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A critical review of workplace drug testing methods for old and new psychoactive substances: Gaps, advances, and perspectives.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Toxicosurveillance of novel opioids: just screening tests may not be enough.The American journal of drug and alcohol abuse · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alberto SalomoneDipartimento di Chimica, Università di Torino, Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8501-4799
Joseph J PalamarDepartment of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Marco VincentiDipartimento di Chimica, Università di Torino, Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6275-7194

Funding

Development of a Rapid Survey to Detect Use of New and Emerging DrugsK01DA038800 · NIDA · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI PALAMAR, JOSEPH J · 2015 to 2019
$879k
National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health K01DA038800National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health K01DA038800.NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA038800
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

WorkplaceHumansPsychotropic DrugsSubstance Abuse DetectionPsychotropic DrugsfentanylNPSWDTworkplace drug testing

Identifiers

PMID31840414
PMCPMC7007821

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.