Evaluation of the drug evaluation and classification program: A critical review of the evidence

Traffic Injury Prevention

Volumn 8, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 368-376

  Beirness, Douglas J ^a   LeCavalier, Jacques ^a   Singhal, Deanna ^b  

^a Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction   (Canada)

^b Traffic Injury Research Foundation   (Canada)

Author keywords

Drug Evaluation and Classification (DEC); Drug Recognition Expert (DRE); Drugged Driving; Impaired driving; Impairment testing

Indexed keywords

STREET DRUG;

ARTICLE; CANADA; CAR DRIVING; HUMAN; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; LAW ENFORCEMENT; LEGAL ASPECT; POLICE; SUBSTANCE ABUSE; VALIDATION STUDY;

AUTOMOBILE DRIVING; CANADA; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; HUMANS; LAW ENFORCEMENT; POLICE; STREET DRUGS; SUBSTANCE ABUSE DETECTION;

EID: 36248936614     PISSN: 15389588     EISSN: 1538957X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15389580701525651     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Adler EV. (1990) Arizona's Drug Recognition Program: A Performance Assessment, J. Southwestern Ass. For. Sci., Vol. 12(1), pp. 12-16.
2. Adler EV, Burns M. (1994) Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) Validation Study, Arizona Governor's Office of Highway Safety, Phoenix.
3. Bigelow GE, Bickel WE, Roache JD, Liebson IA, Nowowieski P. (1985) Identifying Types of Drug Intxoication: Laboratory Evaluation of the Subject Examination Procedure, DOT HS 806 753, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC.
4. Compton RP. (1986) Field Evaluation of the Los Angeles Police Department Drug Detection Program, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC.
5. Hardin G, Meyer RR, Jejuridar SC. (1993) Corroboration Study: A Comparison of DRE Opinions to Toxicology Evaluations of Impaired Drivers in Minnesota. Paper presented at the Joint Meeting of the Society of Forensic Toxicologists and the California Association of Toxicologists.
6. Heishman SJ, Singleton EG, Crouch DJ. (1996) Laboratory Validation Study of Drug Evaluation and Classification Program: Ethanol, Cocaine, and Marijuana, J. Analyt. Tox., Vol. 20, pp. 468-483.
7. Heishman SJ, Singleton EG, Crouch DJ. (1998) Laboratory Validation Study of Drug Evaluation and Classification Program: Alprazolam, d-Amphetamine, Codeine, and Marijuana, J. Analyt. Tox., Vol. 22, pp. 503-514.
8. International Association of Chiefs of Police. (1999) The International Standards of the Drug Evaluation and Classification. Program, The DEC Standards Revision Subcommittee of the Technical Advisory Panel of the IACP Highway Safety Committee. IACP, Arlington, VA.
9. Jones RK, Shinar D, Walsh JM. (2003) State of Knowledge of Drug-Impaired Driving, DOT HS 809 642, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC.
10. Louie P. (1990) Report on the Drug Recognition Evaluation (DRE) Program in Harris County, Texas, J. Southwestern Ass. For. Sci., Vol. 12(1), pp. 17-18.
11. Preusser DF, Ulmer RG, Preusser, CW. (1992) Evaluation of the Impact of the Drug Evaluation and Classification Program on Enforcement, and Adjudication, DOT HS 808 058, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC.
12. Schechtman E, Shinar D. (2005) Modeling Drug Detection and Diagnosis with the Drug Evaluation and Classification Program, Acc. Anal. Prev., Vol. 37, pp. 852-861.
13. Shinar D, Schechtman E. (2005) Drug Identification Performance on the Basis of Observable Signs and Symptoms, Acc. Anal. Prev., Vol. 37, pp. 843-851.
14. Smith JA, Hayes CE, Yolton RL, Rutledge DA, Citek K. (2002) Drug Recognition Expert Evaluations Made Using Limited Data, For. Sci. Int., Vol. 130(2/3), pp. 167-173.