Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36454493›Full record

ArticleForensic toxicology2022

Determination of new psychoactive substances and other drugs in postmortem blood and urine by UHPLC-MS/MS: method validation and analysis of forensic samples.

Ettore Ferrari Júnior, Eloisa Dutra Caldas

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Forensic toxicology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Interpol review of forensic toxicology, 2023-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Quantification of glyphosate and glufosinate in human blood using the aqueous layer recovered from QuEChERS extraction.Analytical sciences : the international journal of the Japan Society for Analytical Chemistry · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Quantitative analysis of ΔAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2025
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Analysis of Cannabinoids in Biological Specimens: An Update.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Observational
  17. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ettore Ferrari JúniorForensic Analysis Laboratory, Criminalistics Institute, The Civil Police of the Federal District, Brasília, DF, 70610-907, Brazil.
Eloisa Dutra CaldasLaboratory of Toxicology, Department of Pharmacy, University of Brasília, Campus Darcy Ribeiro, Brasília, DF, 70910-900, Brazil. eloisa@unb.br.ORCID 0000-0002-7197-6807
Federal Police of Brazil · BRUniversidade de Brasília · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to validate a modified QuEChERS method followed by ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry to determine 79 new psychoactive substances (NPS) and other drugs in blood and urine.

methodsPrescription drugs (n = 23), synthetic cathinones (n = 13), phenethylamines (n = 11); synthetic cannabinoids (n = 8), amphetamines (n = 7) and other psychoactive substances (n = 17) were included in the method. 500 µL of biological fluid was extracted with 2 mL of water/ACN (1:1), 500 mg of anhydrous MgSO

resultsThe method was satisfactorily validated for blood and urine at limit of quantifications ranging from 0.4 to 16 ng/mL, and applied to the analysis of 54 blood (38 postmortem and 16 antemortem) and 16 antemortem urine samples from 68 forensic cases. All urine samples and 59.3% of the blood samples were positive for at least one analyte. Twenty-two analytes were detected in at least one biological sample, including the synthetic cathinones ethylone (222 ng/mL, antemortem blood), eutylone (246 and 446 ng/mL, urine), and N-ethylpentylone (597 and 7.3 ng/mL, postmortem and antemortem blood, respectively).

conclusionsThe validated method was shown to be suitable for the analysis of blood and urine forensic samples and an important tool to collect information on emerging drug threats and understanding the impact of NPS and other drugs in poisoning cases.

Indexed as

Body FluidsTandem Mass SpectrometryCentral Nervous System AgentsChromatography, High Pressure LiquidForensic MedicinePhenethylaminesCentral Nervous System AgentsPhenethylaminesDrugsNew psychoactive substances (NPS)Postmortem bloodUHPLC–MS/MSUrine

Identifiers

PMID36454493
OpenAlexW3202643940

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.