Erratum: Evaluation of oral fluid as a specimen for DUID (Journal of Analytical Toxicology (2017) 41 (517-522) DOI: 10.1093/jat/bkx036)

Veitenheimer Allison, Wagner Jarrad

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

Abstract

Regarding 'Evaluation of Oral Fluid as a Specimen for DUID' by Veitenheimer and Wagner (2017; Journal of Analytical Toxicology, 41, 517-522), five (5) false positives are listed for THC in Table IV, but there should actually be zero (0). Therefore, the Results section (fourth paragraph) should read 'The ELISA showed two FPs for amphetamine, while the DDS®2 showed one FP for cocaine and no FPs for THC'. The authors regret the error.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)E1
JournalJournal of Analytical Toxicology
Volume44
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2020

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Erratum: Evaluation of oral fluid as a specimen for DUID (Journal of Analytical Toxicology (2017) 41 (517-522) DOI: 10.1093/jat/bkx036)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this