ArticlePloS one2025
Racial disparities in urine drug screening among seizure patients in the emergency department.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Implementation of an opioid use disorder (OUD) machine-learning phenotype in real-time for the ADAPT clinical trial.PLOS digital health · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe potential for racial disparity using urine drug screening (UDS) in patients with seizures is sparsely reported. This study aims to determine racial and ethnic disparities when ordering UDS in patients with suspected seizures in the emergency department (ED).
methodsIn this retrospective study, we identified patients over the age of 18 with suspected seizures who presented to the ED at the University of Kansas Medical Center between October 2017 and October 2020. Data encompassed demographic, clinical, electrographic, and UDS information from the electronic medical records (EMR). Data were compared between Black and White patients, as well as between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients. We used the Chi-square test to assess differences in UDS testing based on patient race and ethnicity.
resultsA total of 2945 patients were identified. Among these, 1750 (59%) were White and 821 (28%) were Black patients. Of these patients, 612 (20.8%) underwent UDS in the ED. Black patients had UDS performed more frequently compared to White patients (p = 0.046). Additionally, the positivity rate for UDS was higher among Black patients than White patients (p = 0.019). UDS testing did not differ by ethnicity (p = 0.164). Amphetamine positivity was higher among White patients; however, the positivity rates of other drugs did not differ by race and ethnicity. Black patients were more often admitted to the neurology intensive care unit. No differences in discharge rates or EEG testing were noted across race or ethnicity.
conclusionIncreased UDS testing was seen in Black patients compared to White patients in our single-institution cohort, warranting further research into the underlying causes of this disparity.
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.