ArticleRSC advances2026
Prediction of gas chromatographic retention times of narcotic and hazardous drugs in blood using QSRR and machine learning models.
Article in RSC advances, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The reliable identification of narcotic and hazardous drugs in blood is of critical importance in forensic, clinical, and public health investigations. In this work, gas chromatography (GC) combined with quantitative structure-retention relationship (QSRR) modeling was employed to predict the retention times (RTs) of narcotic and hazardous drugs in blood samples. Experimental RTs of 75 drugs were determined using GC equipped with a non-polar HP-5 column, and a wide range of molecular descriptors was calculated from optimized molecular structures. Genetic algorithms were applied for descriptor selection, and linear and nonlinear predictive models, including GA-PLS, GA-KPLS, and artificial neural networks (ANN), were developed and evaluated using leave-group-out cross-validation and an external test set. The results demonstrated that nonlinear approaches provided superior predictive performance compared to linear models, with the ANN model showing the highest accuracy (
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.