MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003514336 · doi:10.1520/jfs2005118

Identification of Anhydroecgonine Ethyl Ester in the Urine of a Drug Overdose Victim

2005· article· en· W2003514336 on OpenAlexaff
Alan L. Myers, H James Williams, James C. Kraner, Patrick S. Callery

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forensic Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Canadian institutionsOffice of the Chief Medical Examiner
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrineChromatographyChemistrySolid phase extractionGas chromatography–mass spectrometryEthanolGas chromatographyMass spectrometryOrganic chemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Toxicological evaluation of postmortem urine collected from a 41-year-old deceased white male detected anhydroecgonine ethyl ester (ethylecgonidine, AEEE), a transesterification product of smoked cocaine co-abused with ethanol. A solid phase extraction (SPE) method was used to extract cocaine, AEEE, and related metabolites from urine. SPE on a 1 mL urine sample from the decedent followed by GC-MS detected AEEE. Other metabolites identified by GC-MS included cocaine, cocaethylene, and anhydroecgonine methyl ester (AEME). To determine whether some or all of the AEEE was artifactually produced in the heated GC injector port, an alternative LC-MS method was developed. LC/MS following SPE found at least 50 ng/mL of AEEE in the extract. The mass fragmentation (MS/MS and MS3) of AEEE detected in the urine was compared to spectra of authentic, synthesized compound. AEEE is a potential additional forensic marker for the co-abuse of smoked cocaine and ethanol.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.359 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Forensic SciencesSame topicForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisFrench-language works237,207