A strategy for the detection of benzodiazepine drugs using low‐resolution paper‐spray mass spectrometry for harm reduction drug checking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to detect newly emerging substances is of great importance in reducing harms for people who use drugs. New psychoactive substances including novel benzodiazepines in the illicit drug supply have been linked to high rates of overdose deaths while complicating drug checking as an overdose prevention strategy. Paper-spray mass spectrometry (PS-MS) has emerged as a novel strategy to rapidly detect trace components in street drug samples. While targeted, low-resolution PS-MS methods have proven effective, newly emerging substances are often missed. To address this, a method was applied to low-resolution full-scan PS-MS data to aid in the early detection and identification of novel benzodiazepines in the unregulated drug supply. Using the developed method, true positives rates of 0.89 and 0.75 were achieved for bromazolam and etizolam in street samples obtained in a community drug checking service. The applicability of the method was further demonstrated for a novel benzodiazepine, desalkylgidazepam, that has recently emerged in the illicit drug supply.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".