Validation of a sampling method and liquid chromatography mass spectrometry analysis method for measurement of fentanyl and five other illicit drugs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the increased provision of services by health authorities and community organizations allowing supervised inhalation of illicit substances comes concerns about the potential for secondhand exposure to the substances being used, whether in the adjacent community or to workers at the sites. In order to address community concerns surrounding secondhand illicit substance exposure and better protect harm reduction workers, a validated sampling and LC-MS/MS analysis method was developed for 6 illicit drugs: fentanyl, heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine, etizolam, and bromazolam. It was found that the filter used needed to be silanized to be made more inert and avoid loss of analyte due to degradation. Using the silanized filters, recoveries were good (>90%) and the collected samples were found to be stable at room temperature for 2 wk. The sampling volume validated was up to 960 L. The sensitivity and range of the method make it appropriate for short-term (15 min), full shift (8 h), or environmental sampling.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".