MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012207414 · doi:10.1093/jat/bks008

Reactivity of Commercial Benzodiazepine Immunoassays to Phenazepam

2012· article· en· W2012207414 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrick B. Kyle, K. B. Brown, Ashly Bailey, J.L. Stevenson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Toxicology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenzodiazepineDrugs of abuseDiazepamPharmacologyMedicineChromatographyChemistryDrugInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phenazepam is a long acting benzodiazepine that is not controlled in Canada, the United States or many European countries. The abuse of phenazepam has gained recent attention due to the number of hospitalizations and fatalities resulting from overdose. The compound is relatively potent with recommended doses of 0.5-1.0 mg, or 1/10th the recommended dose of diazepam, and is easy to obtain locally or from international suppliers via the internet. Increased risk of phenazepam overdose is attributed to its potency and the forms in which it is supplied. Individuals without scales or balances are prone to estimate dose amounts of powder visually, which can result in significant errors. The detection of phenazepam has been described using various methods including GC, GC/MS and LC/MS, but no data regarding the sensitivity of commercially available immunoassays exist. In this study, phenazepam-spiked urine samples were analyzed using five commercial instruments and two point of care devices. The concentrations of phenazepam required for detection ranged from 140-462 ng/mL, which is comparable to those of other benzodiazepines. Laboratorians and clinicians should be confident that phenazepam will be detected via most commercial drugs of abuse screens in patients after significant ingestion.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Analytical ToxicologySame topicForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisFrench-language works237,207