Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38715924›Full record

ReviewAnalytical science advances2023

Overview of systematic toxicological analysis strategies and their coverage of substances in forensic toxicology.

Karen Rygaard, Meiru Pan, Marie Katrine Klose Nielsen, Petur Weihe Dalsgaard, Brian Schou Rasmussen, Kristian Linnet

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Interpol review of forensic toxicology, 2023-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
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

6 authors.

Karen RygaardDepartment of Forensic Medicine Section of Forensic Chemistry Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9053-9920
Meiru PanDepartment of Forensic Medicine Section of Forensic Chemistry Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark.
Marie Katrine Klose NielsenDepartment of Forensic Medicine Section of Forensic Chemistry Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5159-8549
Petur Weihe DalsgaardDepartment of Forensic Medicine Section of Forensic Chemistry Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8967-7477
Brian Schou RasmussenDepartment of Forensic Medicine Section of Forensic Chemistry Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark.
Kristian LinnetDepartment of Forensic Medicine Section of Forensic Chemistry Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

drug screeningforensic toxicologyhigh‐resolutionmass spectrometrySTA

Identifiers

PMID38715924
PMCPMC10989544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.