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

Allison Veitenheimer; Jarrad Wagner

doi:10.1093/JAT/BKAA045

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

Allison Veitenheimer
, Jarrad Wagner

School of Forensic Sciences

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/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 language	English
Pages (from-to)	E1
Journal	Journal of Analytical Toxicology
Volume	44
Issue number	6
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/JAT/BKAA045
State	Published - 2020

Access to Document

10.1093/JAT/BKAA045

Cite this

@article{ac12e96fadfc44b7aefa553b70b217ad,

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

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{\textregistered}2 showed one FP for cocaine and no FPs for THC'. The authors regret the error.",

author = "Allison Veitenheimer and Jarrad Wagner",

year = "2020",

doi = "10.1093/JAT/BKAA045",

language = "English",

volume = "44",

pages = "E1",

journal = "Journal of Analytical Toxicology",

issn = "0146-4760",

publisher = "Society of Forensic Toxicologists",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Erratum

T2 - Evaluation of oral fluid as a specimen for DUID (Journal of Analytical Toxicology (2017) 41 (517-522) DOI: 10.1093/jat/bkx036)

AU - Veitenheimer, Allison

AU - Wagner, Jarrad

PY - 2020

Y1 - 2020

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85089128361

U2 - 10.1093/JAT/BKAA045

DO - 10.1093/JAT/BKAA045

M3 - Comment/debate

C2 - 32369174

AN - SCOPUS:85089128361

SN - 0146-4760

VL - 44

SP - E1

JO - Journal of Analytical Toxicology

JF - Journal of Analytical Toxicology

IS - 6

ER -

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

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this