MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Detection of benzodiazepines in the unregulated drug supply using point of care and confirmatory drug checking technologies: A validation study

2025· article· en· W4408052554 on OpenAlexafffund
Hannah Crepeault, Samuel Tobias, Jennifer Angelucci, Stephanie Dubland, Mark Lysyshyn, Evan Wood, Lianping Ti

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug and Alcohol Dependence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Quality and Counterfeiting
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal HealthBritish Columbia Institute of TechnologyBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute on Drug AbuseUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsDrugMedicinePoint of careIntensive care medicinePharmacologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Benzodiazepine adulteration in British Columbia's (BC) unregulated opioid supply has risen. Given the health risks associated with co-ingestion of opioids and benzodiazepines, accurate detection of benzodiazepines using point-of-care drug checking technologies is critical. This study aimed to validate the use of Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and benzodiazepine immunoassay strips compared to gold standard laboratory technologies. METHODS: From October 2018 to November 2023, drug samples submitted to harm reduction sites in BC were analyzed using FTIR and benzodiazepine immunoassay strips. A subset of these samples was sent for confirmatory analysis using quantitative nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, and/or liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. We calculated measures of diagnostic accuracy (e.g., sensitivity, specificity) for the point-of-care technologies. RESULTS: Of 1922 samples with point-of-care and confirmatory results, 390 (20 %) tested positive for a benzodiazepine. FTIR sensitivity was 26 % (95 % confidence interval [CI]:21-30 %) and specificity was 99 % (95 % CI:99-100 %). Immunoassay strip sensitivity was 67 % (95 % CI:62-72 %) and specificity was 82 % (95 % CI:79-85 %), respectively. When FTIR and immunoassay strip results were combined, sensitivity was 75 % (95 % CI:70-79 %) and specificity was 82 % (95 % CI: 79-84 %). When etizolam was excluded, the sensitivity and specificity of immunoassay strips were 98 % (95 % CI:94-99 %) and 83 % (95 % CI:81-86 %), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: FTIR did not consistently detect the presence of benzodiazepines and related compounds at point-of-care. However, sensitivity improved when FTIR was combined with immunoassay strips, underscoring the importance of using both technologies in tandem. As etizolam is not a true benzodiazepine, it poses considerable challenges using existing point-of-care drug checking technologies.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug and Alcohol DependenceSame topicPharmaceutical Quality and CounterfeitingFrench-language works237,207