CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 677Forensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisForensic and Genetic ResearchAnalytical chemistry methods development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Potential problems with the interpretation of hair analysis results

Wennig, R.·2000·Forensic Science International
DOI 10.1016/s0379-0738(99)00146-2
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Due to differences in hair growth rate depending on anatomical region, age, gender, ethnicity and interindividual variability, interpretation of parent drug or/and metabolite concentrations in hair is not easy. Furthermore, as drug incorporation mechanisms into hair matrix is not yet fully understood, it is rather difficult to extrapolate details on time and dose from hair segment analysis. If incorporation sources other than from bloodstream (skin secretions and/or external/environmental contamination) are considered, interpretation becomes even more complicated. For evaluating possible passive contamination, it is essential to consider specific identification of metabolites, use of metabolite-to-parent drug ratios, assays of decontamination washes and analysis of specimens collected from other body parts. Cosmetic hair treatment, natural and artificial hair colour, differences in hair structure and specificity of analytical methodology may represent other bias sources affecting concentrations of drugs in hair. A suitable cut-off level related to the LOD will allow correct identification of drugs or metabolites in hair. Regarding the performance of different hair testing laboratories, little information is available at this time to what extent test results are comparable and their interpretation is consistent. Frequency of drug consumption and time intervals between multiple consumption or lag time between consumption and appearance in the hair has not been fully investigated and needs further research.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0379-0738(99)00146-2

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. P. Kintz, Toxicologie et Pharmacologie Médicolégales, Collection Option Bio, Elsevier, Paris, France, 1998.
  2. G. Skopp, L. Pötsch, Drogen in Schweiß und Talg-ein Aspekt der Haaranalyse, Mosbach GTFCh Symposium-Proceed, Moderne Messverfahren im Rahmen der Toxikologischforensischen Begutachtung, 89 (1997) 89–97.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 677

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Wennig, R.
Affiliations
University of Luxembourg (LU)
Corresponding author
Wennig, R.
Venue
Forensic Science International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-01
Volume
107
Issue
1-3
Pages
5-12
ISSN
0379-0738 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0379-0738(99)00146-2
OpenAlex
W2080827705
Cited by
677
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 26
FWCI
11.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Forensic Science International (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical chemistry methods development
Keywords
hair analysis, drug incorporation into hair, hair growth rate, hair color, cut-off values, time delay, interlaboratory comparability
MeSH terms
Forensic Medicine, Hair, Humans, Substance Abuse Detection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review