ArticleToxicology reports2020
Toxicological screening in the Amsterdam acute setting becomes more relevant if the standard panel of the drugs-of-abuse point-of-care test is expanded with GHB and ketamine.
Article in Toxicology reports, 2020. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rising incidence of recreational ketamine use: Clinical cases and management in emergency settings.Toxicology reports · 2025Article
- Gas necrosis and sepsis due to recreational ketamine use.Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo · 2025Article
- 4-Fluoroamphetamine (4-FA) intoxication results in exaggerated blood pressure effects compared to MDMA and amphetamine: A retrospective analysis.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2022Article
- Acute onset heart failure due to reverse type Takotsubo cardiomyopathy caused by a single dose of 4-Fluoroamphetamine in a healthy young individual.Toxicology reports · 2020Article
- Prescription Drug Misuse in "Clubbers" and Disco Goers in Ibiza.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFor diagnosis and treatment in the acute setting, it is crucial to know whether the clinical status of patients might be explained by the effects of drugs.The objective of this study was to determine how many drugs were detected by comprehensive toxicological screening, that could not be detected with a routine drugs-of-abuse point-of-care test (DOA-POCT) and which drugs of abuse (DOA) were relevant. A secondary objective was to determine in how many patients comprehensive toxicological screening provided additional clinically relevant information.
methodsIn this prospective study, patients were included in whom a DOA-POCT was performed and residual urine and serum samples were available.DOA-POCT were performed using the Triage® TOX Drug Screen. Comprehensive toxicological screening was performed using 1) the Toxtyper™ LC-MS
resultsA total of 100 patients were included. In 91 of these patients, comprehensive toxicological screening identified 234 drugs that were not identified by DOA-POCT. However, DOA-POCT identified 34 DOA that were not identified by comprehensive toxicological screening.Seven percent of comprehensive toxicological screening results were found to be clinically relevant, all with regard to diagnosis. GHB and ketamine were the drugs involved. Another 38 % strengthened confidence in diagnosis and patient care decisions.
conclusionGHB and ketamine should be added to the panel of drugs we screen at the point of care in the Amsterdam acute setting.
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.