Observational studyPloS one2024
Drugs in blood and urine samples from victims of suspected exposure to drink spiking: A prospective observational study from Oslo, Norway.
Observational study in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tramadol in drug-facilitated sexual assault: global case prevalence, pharmacology, and drug interactions.Journal of analytical toxicology · 2026Review
- Toxicological findings in suspected drugging incidents in Denmark from 2022 - 2024.Forensic toxicology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePeople regularly contact emergency medicine services concerned that they have been exposed to drink spiking, i.e., exposure to drugs without their knowledge or permission. We identified drugs in blood and urine samples from patients suspecting exposure to drink spiking, with special consideration for drugs not reported taken by the patient (unreported drugs).
methodsFrom September 2018 to May 2019, we collected blood and urine samples from patients 16 years or older presenting at an emergency clinic in Oslo, Norway, within 48 hours of suspected exposure to drink spiking. We also collected information on ethanol ingestion and drugs taken. Blood samples were analyzed for 20 classical recreational drugs using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) and an automated enzymatic method for ethanol. Urine samples were analyzed using immunoassay methods and a specific gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GCMS) method for gammahydroxybutyrate (GHB).
resultsFrom 100 included patients (median age 24 years, 62 females), we collected 100 blood samples and 72 urine samples. Median time since exposure was 5 hours. Unreported drugs were found in 15 patients. Unreported drugs in the blood samples were clonazepam in 3, methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) in 3, amphetamine in 2, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in 2, tramadol in 1, cocaine in 1, and methamphetamine in 1. Unreported drugs in the urine samples were cocaine in 5, amphetamine in 4, ecstasy in 3, and cannabis in 2. Ethanol was found in 69 patients, all reporting ethanol ingestion. Median blood ethanol concentration was higher in patients with no unreported drugs detected, 1.00‰ (interquartile range (IQR) 0-1.52) vs. 0‰ (IQR 0-0.46) (p<0.001). GHB was not detected.
conclusionUnreported drugs, possibly used for drink spiking, were found in 15% of patients. Blood ethanol concentration was higher when no unreported drugs were found. GHB was not detected in any patient.
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.