ArticleJournal of forensic sciences2023
Detection of fentanyl, synthetic opioids, and ketamine in hair specimens from purposive samples of American and Italian populations.
Article in Journal of forensic sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interpol review of forensic drug chemistry, 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
- Insights from a 6-year hair drug analysis compendium in drug-facilitated sexual assault cases.Journal of forensic sciences · 2026Article
- Use of Illegally Manufactured Fentanyl in the United States: Current Trends.Current addiction reports · 2025Article
- Retrospective Evaluation of Novel Synthetic Opioids and Xylazine Chronic Intake by Post-Mortem Hair Testing.Drug testing and analysis · 2025Article
- First evidence in an oversea French department of the deadly risk of protonitazene use: about 5 post mortem cases.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Article
- Determination of Arylcyclohexylamines in Biological Specimens: Sensors and Sample Pre-Treatment Approaches.Micromachines · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
With the current crisis related to the diffusion of fentanyl and other novel opioids in several countries and populations, new and effective approaches are needed to better elucidate the phenomenon. In this context, hair testing offers a unique perspective in the investigation of drug consumption, producing useful information in terms of exposure to psychoactive substances. In this research, we applied targeted ultra-high performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) analytical methods to detect novel synthetic and prescription opioids and other common controlled psychoactive drugs in the keratin matrix. A total of 120 hair samples were analyzed from the United States (US) and Italy, segmented when longer than 6 cm, and then analyzed. In the 60 samples (83 segments in total) analyzed from a purposive sample of data collected in the US, fentanyl was detected in 14 cases (16.9%), with no detection of nitazens or brorphine. We also detected fentanyl metabolites, despropionyl-p-fluorofentanyl, and prescription opioids. In the 60 samples collected in Italy (91 segments in total), ketamine was the most prevalent compound detected (in 41 cases; 45.1%), with ketamine demonstrating a strong correlation with detection of amphetamines and MDMA, likely due to co-use of these substances in recreational contexts. Several common drugs were also detected but no exposure to fentanyl or its analogs were detected. Results of this retrospective exploration of drug use add to increasing evidence that hair testing can serve as a useful adjunct to epidemiology studies that seek to determine biologically confirmed use and exposure in high-risk populations.
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.