MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W864786500 · doi:10.1520/jfs15330j

Review of: <i>Handbook of Analytical Separations, Volume 2, Forensic Science</i>

2002· article· en· W864786500 sur OpenAlexaff
Daniel S. Isenschmid

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Forensic Sciences · 2002
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueForensic Fingerprint Detection Methods
Établissements canadiensOffice of the Chief Medical Examiner
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésForensic scienceEngineeringVolume (thermodynamics)Library scienceComputer scienceHistoryPhysicsArchaeologyThermodynamics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract This is the second volume of Handbook of Analytical Separations and is entitled Forensic Science. While several topics in forensic science are included, the first part of the book, Forensic toxicology, make up the bulk of this volume (597 pp.). This part of the book is divided into three sections: illicit drugs, therapeutic drugs, and other topics of toxicological relevance. A review of the analytical toxicology of many major drug classes are considered in the individual chapters that make up the first two sections of this part of the book. Chapter topics include opiate agonists, cocaine and metabolites, amphetamines, hallucinogens, cannabinoids, sedatives and hypnotics, antidepressants and antipsychotics, nonopioid analgesics, and a catch-all chapter that includes cardiac glycosides, oral antidiabetics, and muscle relaxants. Each chapter first reviews methods used to isolate drugs from biological matrices (and plant material where applicable). Included are traditional liquid-liquid and solid-phase extraction procedures as well as newer isolation techniques such as supercritical fluid extraction. Separation methods discussed in most chapters include thin layer chromatography, liquid and gas chromatography and in some cases, capillary electrophoresis. Derivatization methods, if applicable, are either presented in a distinct section of a chapter or incorporated into the discussion of detection techniques. Methods of detection are usually integrated into the discussion of each separation technique. In addition to mass spectrometric detection, I was glad to see that most authors also reviewed other detection techniques including nitrogen-phosphorus, diode-array, electron-capture, and fluorescence. Notably absent from most chapters, except the chapter on cannabinoids, was any discussion of immunoassays. This is unfortunate as important issues such as cross-reactivity to various compounds, interferences, and comparisons between different types of commercially available immunoassays are not presented to the user of this volume. Most authors considered the analysis of drugs in various matrices, although the manner in which this data were presented varied considerably. Some authors chose to include this in their discussion of isolation techniques while others chose to dedicate sections of their chapter to each type of matrix. A separate chapter on alternative matrices also occurs later in the book. The authors of the chapter on the analysis of cocaine analytes included a table that lists the analytes detected, specimen type, internal standards, column type, instrumentation details, performance characteristics, and reference. I found this to be extremely useful for method comparison and wish that each chapter would have included a table similar to this. In addition to analytical methods, many chapters also contain additional topics of forensic significance for the analytes discussed, e.g., morphine (poppy seeds), cocaine (stability), amphetamines (source differentiation), etc. In general, the chapters on illicit drugs were more thorough than the chapters on therapeutic drugs. However, many more analytes had to be considered in the latter section. The chapter on antidepressants and antipsychotics, in particular, was too brief. In addition, this chapter discussed tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin reuptake inhibitors, neuroleptics, and antipsychotics as a group. It would have been much more useful to have this information subdivided by drug class with greater emphasis on a review of the published methods, rather than methods used in the authors' laboratory. The chapter on sedatives and hypnotics did break down the drugs by class, but was also too brief in its review of this important group of drugs, especially the benzodiazepines. Unlike the chapters in the section on illicit drugs, the chapters on therapeutic drugs did not include other relevant issues to the analytes discussed (e.g., postmortem redistribution).

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,096
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,320

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0040,005
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0040,004
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0960,106

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,069
Tête enseignante GPT0,385
Écart entre enseignants0,317 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2002
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Forensic SciencesMême sujetForensic Fingerprint Detection MethodsTravaux en français237 207