ReviewAnalytical science advances2023
Overview of systematic toxicological analysis strategies and their coverage of substances in forensic toxicology.
Review in Analytical science advances, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interpol review of forensic toxicology, 2023-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
- From blood to brain: postmortem brain concentrations and brain-blood ratios of chlorprothixene, clozapine, olanzapine, and quetiapine.Journal of analytical toxicology · 2026Article
- Characteristics of drug-facilitated sexual assault (DFSA): an observational study at a Danish sexual assault center.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Observational
- Hydrocarbon forensic chemistry: exploring multiple fronts-a minireview.Forensic sciences research · 2025Article
- Brain concentrations and brain-blood ratios of amitriptyline and nortriptyline in forensic postmortem cases.Journal of analytical toxicology · 2025Article
- Vitreous humor in the forensic toxicology of quetiapine and its metabolites.Forensic toxicology · 2024Article
- Screening for Forensically Relevant Drugs Using Data-Independent High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry.Chemical research in toxicology · 2024Article
- Overview of systematic toxicological analysis strategies and their coverage of substances in forensic toxicology.Analytical science advances · 2023Review
- Toxicology Testing: Interpreting What That Number Means.Missouri medicineArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Systematic toxicological analysis (STA) is the process of using an adequate analytical methodology to detect and identify as many potentially toxicologically relevant compounds as possible in biological samples. STA is an important part of everyday routine work within forensic toxicology, and several methods for STA have frequently been published and reviewed independently. However, the many drugs and other substances involved, as well as the constant emergence of new ones, may pose a major challenge in STA, which often demands a strategy involving multiple analytical methods in parallel. Such strategies have been published and evaluated less frequently despite their relevance in forensic toxicology. This mini-review briefly summarizes commonly applied methods for STA in forensic toxicology, including gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and liquid chromatography-MS (LC-MS) methods, and highlights some of their potential pitfalls. Second, it provides an overview of previously reported strategies to conduct STA, including a presentation of the STA strategy applied in the authors' laboratory. This involves broad drug screening by LC-high-resolution MS, supported by targeted screening and quantification using LC-tandem MS, headspace (HS)-GC-MS, HS-GC-flame ionization detector and other complementary methods. The STA strategy aims to cover as many potentially relevant drugs as possible and seeks to reduce potential pitfalls arising in forensic casework. The review underlines that not every substance can be identified in all circumstances even with a comprehensive STA strategy.
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.