MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110546088 · doi:10.1093/jat/33.8.550

Cocaine Detection in Postmortem Samples Following Therapeutic Administration

2009· article· en· W2110546088 on OpenAlexaff
Karen M. Bailey, D. J. Clay, M. A. Gebhardt, Marbina Schmidt, Nabila A. Haikal, James C. Kraner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Toxicology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Canadian institutionsOffice of the Chief Medical Examiner
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineForensic toxicologyAutopsyForensic pathologyNoseMedical jurisprudenceDrugs of abuseCause of deathDiseaseIntensive care medicineDrugSurgeryPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cocaine is one of the most widely abused drugs and one that is frequently encountered in forensic toxicology laboratories. Most often, the detection of cocaine would lead toxicologists and forensic pathologists to believe that the drug was used illicitly; however, cocaine is an effective local anesthetic and vasoconstrictor and is used clinically in surgeries of the eye, ear, nose, and throat. Therefore, it is important to note that the presence of cocaine and its metabolites in forensic samples cannot always be attributed to abuse and that a thorough investigation and review of medical records is warranted before an informed conclusion can be made. In this case report, a 54-year-old male died three days after an altercation in which he suffered multiple injuries. In addition to natural disease and injuries documented at autopsy, cocaine and its metabolites were detected in the decedent's urine, and a review of surgical records showed that earlier on the day of death, he was administered cocaine clinically during a procedure to repair nasal bone fractures. If not for this comprehensive investigation and review of surgical records, the assumption of cocaine abuse might have otherwise been made and the cause and manner of death incorrectly established.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.886

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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