MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Date Rape Drugs in Las Vegas: Detection After the Fact [11I]

2019· article· en· W2944608843 on OpenAlexaff
Anthea B. Mahesan Paul, Arnold M. Mahesan

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAutopsyMedical examinerPoison controlInjury preventionForensic toxicologyRetrospective cohort studyMedical jurisprudencePsychiatryFlunitrazepamEmergency medicineFamily medicineInternal medicinePathologyBenzodiazepine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Date rape drugs (DRDs) are drugs which can be used to conduct drug-facilitated sexual assault. The three major drugs classified by the U.S Department of Health & Human Services misused for this purpose are Rohypnol (Flunitrazepam), Gamma hydroxybutyric acid (GHB) and Ketamine. Existing studies in the literature analyze self-reported incidents in women which likely underestimate the prevalence of this problem. Our study aimed to evaluate how frequently there was clinical or criminal suspicion of DRD use prior to autopsy evaluation in a group of deceased DRD positive women. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of all female decedents aged 20-55 who tested positive for Flunitrazepam, GHB and Ketamine referred to the Clark County medical examiner from 2000-2015. Medical records, police report, and autopsy findings were reviewed. All decedents underwent standard toxicology screening from whole blood toxicology analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using student t-test for continuous variables and chi-square for categorical variables. RESULTS: 23 women referred to the Clark County medical examiner tested positive for DRDs. At autopsy 6 women were positive for Rohypnol, 15 for GHB, and 2 for ketamine. After clinical, autopsy and police report review, 74% of 17/23 women had no clinical suspicion of DRD involvement at the time of death. Specifically, 83% (n=5) women had no suspicion of flunitrazepam use prior to toxicology results. CONCLUSION: Only a small minority of cases raised suspicion of DRD use upon police or clinical assessment. DRD use may be more prevalent in society than previously thought posing a significant public health threat.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisFrench-language works237,207