ArticleHarm reduction journal2026
Assessing the real-world performance of xylazine test strips for community-based drug checking in Los Angeles.
Article in Harm reduction journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe veterinary sedative xylazine is increasingly found in illicit fentanyl and has been associated with numerous health harms. Xylazine test strips (XTS) are an emerging technology that can theoretically assist consumers in avoiding xylazine, but they require real-world validation. We leverage community-based drug checking program data to compare real-world XTS performance to 'gold standard' methods.
methodsSamples were initially assessed by dissolving 1 mg of drug product in 1 mL water and dipping an XTS ("first generation" Wisebatch™) in the sample. Subsequently, confirmatory testing was performed by sending samples to the National Institute of Standards and Technology for qualitative analysis using direct analysis in real-time mass spectrometry (DART-MS). A subset was analyzed quantitatively with liquid chromatography gas spectrometry (LC-MS) to quantify xylazine, fentanyl, and other compounds.
resultsA total of n = 1570 drug samples were analyzed between June 2023 and May 2025, and a total of n = 801 XTS were used. N = 715 comparisons between xylazine test strips and mass spectrometry results could be made, including n = 333 among samples that tested positive for fentanyl. Of these, n = 63 samples were confirmed to contain xylazine by mass spectrometry, of which the majority contained low concentrations (average concentration 2.3%; 78% of samples contained less than < 1% xylazine by weight). Of the 63, n = 34 were correctly identified as positive by XTS, yielding sensitivity of 54.0 %. Of n = 270 xylazine negative samples, n = 235 were correctly categorized (specificity = 87.0%). Most false positives occurred with lidocaine present.
conclusionsIn our sample, with a large percentage of low concentration xylazine samples, "first generation" Wisebatch XTS had a relatively low sensitivity, but higher specificity. This highlights the value of confirmatory testing and the complicated and often confusing nature of point-of-care test strips for novel substance detection. Lot testing and validation studies are needed to improve quality control in this area.
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.