ArticleNeuropsychopharmacology reports2024
Qualitative analysis of blood from patients engaging in deliberate self-harm: Differences between prescribed and detected drugs.
Article in Neuropsychopharmacology reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The determination of the novel insomnia medication lemborexant using a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method, and its quantitation in clinical and forensic samples.Forensic toxicology · 2026Article
- Qualitative analysis of blood from patients engaging in deliberate self-harm: Differences between prescribed and detected drugs.Neuropsychopharmacology reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile drugs are sometimes taken during deliberate self-harm (DSH), no study has attempted to analyze drugs in the blood of DSH patients and compare them with prescribed medications or other drugs. In this study, drugs were analyzed from the blood of DSH patients, and the detected, prescribed, and suspected drugs were documented.
methodsPatients who practiced DSH and were transferred to the emergency sites of Fukuoka University Hospital between April 2021 and September 2022 participated in the study. Psychiatrists assessed information such as the history of psychiatric treatment and recent methods of DSH, as well as prescribed drugs within 1 month of presenting to the hospital. Blood samples were analyzed using LC-MS/MS. Participants were divided into groups according to whether or not they were prescribed psychotropics within 1 month.
resultsFifty-five patients were enrolled in the study. Forty had been prescribed psychotropics within 1 month of hospital admission. However, non-prescribed drugs (NPD) were detected in 42 of the 55 participants (76%). The detection of NPD was significantly high among patients with overdose of medications and OTC drugs (p = 0.036), but NPD were also detected in patients who engaged in other methods (n = 14), and in patients without prescribed medication (n = 10). DISCUSSION: This is the first study focused on the drug analysis of blood from patients engaging in DSH. Approximately 80% of the DSH patients in this study had taken NPD, revealing a large discrepancy between prescribed medications and those detected in the blood.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.