Determination of illicit drugs in seized materials: Role of sampling and analysis in estimation of measurement uncertainty

Forensic Science International

Volumn 208, Issue 1-3, 2011, Pages 108-123

  Zamengo, Luca ^a   Frison, Giampietro ^a   Gregio, Maria ^a   Orr, Giorgio ^a   Sciarrone, Rocco ^a  

^a Regional Health Information System   (Italy)

Author keywords

Compliance; Illicit drugs; Measurement uncertainty; Sampling uncertainty; Seized materials

Indexed keywords

AMPHETAMINE; CAFFEINE; CANNABIS; COCAINE; DIAMORPHINE; ILLICIT DRUG; LACTOSE; LEVAMISOLE; LIDOCAINE; MANNITOL; PHENACETIN; RESIN;

ACCURACY; ANALYTICAL UNCERTAINTY; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; CALCULATION; CHEMICAL PROCEDURES; COMMINUTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOCUMENTATION; DRUG DETERMINATION; FORENSIC TOXICOLOGY; GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; LAW ENFORCEMENT; MATERIALS HANDLING; MEASUREMENT; PARTICLE SIZE; POWDER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRIVACY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SAMPLE SIZE; SAMPLING; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; UNCERTAINTY; WEIGHT;

EID: 79955465394     PISSN: 03790738     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.11.018     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. R. Durrant, Jo. Thakker, Substance Use and Abuse: Cultural and Historical Perspectives, Sage Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks, California, 2003.
2. Han B., Gfroerer J.C., Colliver J.D. Associations between duration of illicit drug use and health conditions: results from the 2005-2007 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health Annals of Epidemiology. Ann. Epidemiol. 2010, 20:289-297.
3. Goforth H.W., Murtaugh R., Fernandez F. Neurologic aspects of drug abuse. Neurol. Clin. 2010, 28:199-215.
4. Cole M.D. The Analysis of Controlled Substances 2003, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
5. D.P.R, 9 ottobre 1990, n. 309, Testo unico delle leggi in materia di disciplina degli stupefacenti e sostanze psicotrope, prevenzione, cura e riabilitazione dei relativi stati di tossicodipendenze.
6. National Early Warning System, http://www.allertadroga.it/.
7. Christie B. Heroin contaminated with anthrax has killed 11 people. BMJ 2010, 340:c937.
8. Health Protection Agency, Guidelines, (last accessed 2010-07-07). http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb%26HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1218180274609.
9. Joint ECDC and EMCDDA, Threat Assessment Anthrax outbreak among drug users, UK and Germany (Update: 11 February 2010), (last accessed 2010-07-07). http://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/activities/sciadvice/Documents/2010-02-11-TA_anthrax_IDU_ECDC-EMCDDA.pdf.
10. ISO/IEC 17025:2005, General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories.
11. Analytical Methods Committee Technical Brief No 19, Terminology - the key to understanding analytical science, Part 2: sampling and sample preparation, 2005.
12. M.H. Ramsey. S.L.R. Ellison (Eds.), Eurachem/EUROLAB/CITAC/Nordtest/AMC Guide: Measurement uncertainty arising from sampling: a guide to methods and approaches Eurachem, 2007.
13. Gy P.M. Sampling of Particulate Materials, Theory and Practice 1982, Elsevier, Amsterdam.
14. Gy P.M. Sampling of Heterogeneous and Dynamic Material Systems 1992, Elsevier, Amsterdam.
15. Gy P.M. Sampling for Analytical Purposes 1998, Chichester, Wiley.
16. Petersen L., Minkkinen P., Esbensen K.H. Representative sampling for reliable data analysis: theory of sampling. Chemometrics Intell. Lab. Syst. 2005, 77:261-277.
17. Minkkinen P. Practical applications of sampling theory. Chemometrics Intell. Lab. Syst. 2004, 74:85-94.
18. Patricia L. Smith, A Primer for Sampling Solids, Liquids, and Gases Based on the Sevens Sampling Errors of Pierre Gy, SIAM, 2001.
19. Gerlach R.W. Gy sampling theory in environmental studies 2. Subsampling error estimates. Anal. Chim. Acta 2003, 490:159-168.
20. Zamengo L., Barbiero N., Gregio M., Orr G. Combined scanning electron microscopy and image analysis to investigate airborne submicron particles: a comparison between personal samplers. Chemosphere 2009, 76:313-323.
21. Drugs Working Group of the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (DWG-ENFSI), Guidelines on Representative Drug Sampling, United Nations, New York, 2009.
22. D'Agostini G. Bayesian Reasoning in Data Analysis: A Critical Introduction 2003, World Scientific Publishing.
23. Miller J.N., Miller J.C. Statistics and Chemometrics for Analytical Chemistry 2005, Pearson Education Limited. fifth ed.
24. EURACHEM/CITAC Guide CG 4, Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement, 2007.
25. JCGM 200:2008, International vocabulary of metrology, Basic and general concepts and associated terms (VIM).
26. O' Donnel G.E. Treatment of bias in estimating measurement uncertainty. Analyst 2005, 130:721-729.
27. Barwick V.J., Stephen L.R.E. Measurement uncertainty: approaches to the evaluation of uncertainties associated with recovery. Analyst 1999, 124:981-990.
28. Thomas P.J.L. Use of recovery and bias information in analytical chemistry and estimation of its uncertainty contribution. Trends Anal. Chem. 2008, 27(10).
29. Synek V. Attempts to include uncorrected bias in the measurement uncertainty. Talanta 2005, 65:829-837.
30. Maroto A. Should non-significant bias be included in the uncertainty budget?. Accred Qual. Assur. 2002, 7:90-94.
31. Magnusson B., Ellison S.L.R. Treatment of uncorrected measurement bias in uncertainty estimation for chemical measurements. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2008, 390:201-213.
32. Phillips S.D., Eberhardt Brian Parry K.R. Guidelines for expressing the uncertainty of measurement results containing uncorrected bias. J. Res. Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. 1997, 102:577.
33. Bolstad W.M. Introduction to Bayesian Statistics 2005, A John Wiley & Sons Inc., Publication.
34. ILAC-G8 03/2009: Guidelines on the Reporting of Compliance with Specification.
35. EURACHEM/CITA.C, Guide Use of Uncertainty Information in Compliance Assessment, 2007.