The role of variations in growth rate and sample collection on interpreting results of segmental analyses of hair

Abstract Segmental analysis of hair for drugs, metabolites, and poisons has been widely reported in the scientific literature over the past two decades. Two fundamental assumptions in interpreting results of such analyses are (1) an average linear growth rate of head hair of 1 cm/month and (2) that...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Forensic science international 2011-07, Vol.210 (1), p.110-116
Hauptverfasser: LeBeau, Marc A, Montgomery, Madeline A, Brewer, Jason D
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 116
container_issue 1
container_start_page 110
container_title Forensic science international
container_volume 210
creator LeBeau, Marc A
Montgomery, Madeline A
Brewer, Jason D
description Abstract Segmental analysis of hair for drugs, metabolites, and poisons has been widely reported in the scientific literature over the past two decades. Two fundamental assumptions in interpreting results of such analyses are (1) an average linear growth rate of head hair of 1 cm/month and (2) that sample collections occur with the hair being cut directly next to the scalp. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the variability associated with growth rate of human head hair, as well as the ability to uniformly collect hair next to the scalp. The results were used to determine how these factors affect the interpretation of results generated in segmental analysis of hair. A thorough literature review was conducted to assess the range of linear growth of human head hair from the vertex posterior and occipital regions. The results were compiled to establish the average (1.06 cm/month), as well as the range of possible growth rates of head hair. The range was remarkable and suggests that conclusions based on the 1-cm/month growth rate could be significantly skewed. A separate study was undertaken to evaluate collection of hair next to the scalp. Fourteen individuals were provided oral instructions, as well as a written standard collection procedure for head hair. The experience levels among the collectors varied from novice to expert. Each individual collected hair from dolls with short- and long-hair. Immediately following each collection, the sampling area was evaluated to determine how close to the scalp the cuts were made, as well as the variability in the lengths of hair remaining at the sampled area. From our collection study, we determined that 0.8 ± 0.1 cm of hair was left on the scalp after cutting. When taking into account the amount of hair left on the scalp after collecting, the use of a growth rate of 1.06 cm/month, and the assumption that it takes two weeks for newly formed hair in the follicle to reach the scalp, we find that the first 1-cm segment of hair typically corresponds to hair formed 1.3 ± 0.2 to 2.2 ± 0.4 months (95% confidence) earlier. The impact of these findings as it relates to the corresponding time for each additional segment is demonstrated. As a result, we recommend that hair collection be delayed 8 weeks after a suspected ingestion to ensure that the sample fully represents the exposure period. The results of this study suggest that the variability in the growth rate of human head hair, as well as the inconsistent collectio
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.02.015
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_901659465</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0379073811000776</els_id><sourcerecordid>2398430561</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c542t-c3416bb60a821663096f5269a4a25c1017441ab04c3994ee2624dea7b84c15233</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkltr3DAQhU1paTZp_0JrWkKf7OpmWX4JhNAbBPrQ9FnI8nhXW9naSHbK_vuOs9sEAoWCQCC-OXM0Z7LsLSUlJVR-3JZ9iMk6N04lI5SWhJWEVs-yFVU1KyRT_Hm2IrxuClJzdZKdprQlhFQVky-zE0a5YrJWq-z2ZgN5DB7y0Od3JjozuTCm3I35Oobf0yaPZoLcjF2ezLBDzgbvwS5UjgcNQNxFmNy4ziOk2U9pkUqwHmCcjMdS4_cJ7l83xsVX2Yve-ASvj_dZ9vPzp5urr8X19y_fri6vC1sJNhWWCyrbVhKjGJWSk0b2aL4xwrDK4hBqIahpibC8aQQAk0x0YOpWCUsrxvlZ9uGgu4vhdoY06cElC96bEcKcdINzrBohKyTfPSG3YY5oO2lVL6NEJwi9_xdECRdKEXIvVR8oG0NKEXq9i24wcY-QXpLTW_2QnF6S04RpTA4r3xz153aA7qHub1QInB8Bk6zxfTSjdemRE5xi1IvQ5YEDHO6dg6ixG4wWOhcxN90F9x9mLp5oWO9Gh21_wR7S4891wgL9Y1m0Zc8oxR2ra8n_AJEDzvM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1034880065</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The role of variations in growth rate and sample collection on interpreting results of segmental analyses of hair</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><source>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</source><creator>LeBeau, Marc A ; Montgomery, Madeline A ; Brewer, Jason D</creator><creatorcontrib>LeBeau, Marc A ; Montgomery, Madeline A ; Brewer, Jason D</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Segmental analysis of hair for drugs, metabolites, and poisons has been widely reported in the scientific literature over the past two decades. Two fundamental assumptions in interpreting results of such analyses are (1) an average linear growth rate of head hair of 1 cm/month and (2) that sample collections occur with the hair being cut directly next to the scalp. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the variability associated with growth rate of human head hair, as well as the ability to uniformly collect hair next to the scalp. The results were used to determine how these factors affect the interpretation of results generated in segmental analysis of hair. A thorough literature review was conducted to assess the range of linear growth of human head hair from the vertex posterior and occipital regions. The results were compiled to establish the average (1.06 cm/month), as well as the range of possible growth rates of head hair. The range was remarkable and suggests that conclusions based on the 1-cm/month growth rate could be significantly skewed. A separate study was undertaken to evaluate collection of hair next to the scalp. Fourteen individuals were provided oral instructions, as well as a written standard collection procedure for head hair. The experience levels among the collectors varied from novice to expert. Each individual collected hair from dolls with short- and long-hair. Immediately following each collection, the sampling area was evaluated to determine how close to the scalp the cuts were made, as well as the variability in the lengths of hair remaining at the sampled area. From our collection study, we determined that 0.8 ± 0.1 cm of hair was left on the scalp after cutting. When taking into account the amount of hair left on the scalp after collecting, the use of a growth rate of 1.06 cm/month, and the assumption that it takes two weeks for newly formed hair in the follicle to reach the scalp, we find that the first 1-cm segment of hair typically corresponds to hair formed 1.3 ± 0.2 to 2.2 ± 0.4 months (95% confidence) earlier. The impact of these findings as it relates to the corresponding time for each additional segment is demonstrated. As a result, we recommend that hair collection be delayed 8 weeks after a suspected ingestion to ensure that the sample fully represents the exposure period. The results of this study suggest that the variability in the growth rate of human head hair, as well as the inconsistent collection of hair, significantly affect the interpretation of results from segmental analysis of hair.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0379-0738</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-6283</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.02.015</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21382678</identifier><identifier>CODEN: FSINDR</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kidlington: Elsevier Ireland Ltd</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Collection ; Compliance ; Cutting ; Forensic medicine ; Forensic science ; Forensic sciences ; General aspects ; Growth rate ; Hair ; Hair - growth &amp; development ; Hair analysis ; Human ; Humans ; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) ; Medical sciences ; Pathology ; Poisons ; Professional Competence ; Public health. Hygiene ; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine ; Sampling ; Segmental analysis ; Segments ; Sex crimes ; Specimen Handling - methods ; Studies ; Substance Abuse Detection - methods ; Toys</subject><ispartof>Forensic science international, 2011-07, Vol.210 (1), p.110-116</ispartof><rights>2011</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited 2011</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Sequoia S.A. Jul 15, 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c542t-c3416bb60a821663096f5269a4a25c1017441ab04c3994ee2624dea7b84c15233</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c542t-c3416bb60a821663096f5269a4a25c1017441ab04c3994ee2624dea7b84c15233</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1034880065?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,3552,27931,27932,46002,64392,64394,64396,72476</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=24310735$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21382678$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>LeBeau, Marc A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Montgomery, Madeline A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brewer, Jason D</creatorcontrib><title>The role of variations in growth rate and sample collection on interpreting results of segmental analyses of hair</title><title>Forensic science international</title><addtitle>Forensic Sci Int</addtitle><description>Abstract Segmental analysis of hair for drugs, metabolites, and poisons has been widely reported in the scientific literature over the past two decades. Two fundamental assumptions in interpreting results of such analyses are (1) an average linear growth rate of head hair of 1 cm/month and (2) that sample collections occur with the hair being cut directly next to the scalp. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the variability associated with growth rate of human head hair, as well as the ability to uniformly collect hair next to the scalp. The results were used to determine how these factors affect the interpretation of results generated in segmental analysis of hair. A thorough literature review was conducted to assess the range of linear growth of human head hair from the vertex posterior and occipital regions. The results were compiled to establish the average (1.06 cm/month), as well as the range of possible growth rates of head hair. The range was remarkable and suggests that conclusions based on the 1-cm/month growth rate could be significantly skewed. A separate study was undertaken to evaluate collection of hair next to the scalp. Fourteen individuals were provided oral instructions, as well as a written standard collection procedure for head hair. The experience levels among the collectors varied from novice to expert. Each individual collected hair from dolls with short- and long-hair. Immediately following each collection, the sampling area was evaluated to determine how close to the scalp the cuts were made, as well as the variability in the lengths of hair remaining at the sampled area. From our collection study, we determined that 0.8 ± 0.1 cm of hair was left on the scalp after cutting. When taking into account the amount of hair left on the scalp after collecting, the use of a growth rate of 1.06 cm/month, and the assumption that it takes two weeks for newly formed hair in the follicle to reach the scalp, we find that the first 1-cm segment of hair typically corresponds to hair formed 1.3 ± 0.2 to 2.2 ± 0.4 months (95% confidence) earlier. The impact of these findings as it relates to the corresponding time for each additional segment is demonstrated. As a result, we recommend that hair collection be delayed 8 weeks after a suspected ingestion to ensure that the sample fully represents the exposure period. The results of this study suggest that the variability in the growth rate of human head hair, as well as the inconsistent collection of hair, significantly affect the interpretation of results from segmental analysis of hair.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Collection</subject><subject>Compliance</subject><subject>Cutting</subject><subject>Forensic medicine</subject><subject>Forensic science</subject><subject>Forensic sciences</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Growth rate</subject><subject>Hair</subject><subject>Hair - growth &amp; development</subject><subject>Hair analysis</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Pathology</subject><subject>Poisons</subject><subject>Professional Competence</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</subject><subject>Sampling</subject><subject>Segmental analysis</subject><subject>Segments</subject><subject>Sex crimes</subject><subject>Specimen Handling - methods</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Substance Abuse Detection - methods</subject><subject>Toys</subject><issn>0379-0738</issn><issn>1872-6283</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkltr3DAQhU1paTZp_0JrWkKf7OpmWX4JhNAbBPrQ9FnI8nhXW9naSHbK_vuOs9sEAoWCQCC-OXM0Z7LsLSUlJVR-3JZ9iMk6N04lI5SWhJWEVs-yFVU1KyRT_Hm2IrxuClJzdZKdprQlhFQVky-zE0a5YrJWq-z2ZgN5DB7y0Od3JjozuTCm3I35Oobf0yaPZoLcjF2ezLBDzgbvwS5UjgcNQNxFmNy4ziOk2U9pkUqwHmCcjMdS4_cJ7l83xsVX2Yve-ASvj_dZ9vPzp5urr8X19y_fri6vC1sJNhWWCyrbVhKjGJWSk0b2aL4xwrDK4hBqIahpibC8aQQAk0x0YOpWCUsrxvlZ9uGgu4vhdoY06cElC96bEcKcdINzrBohKyTfPSG3YY5oO2lVL6NEJwi9_xdECRdKEXIvVR8oG0NKEXq9i24wcY-QXpLTW_2QnF6S04RpTA4r3xz153aA7qHub1QInB8Bk6zxfTSjdemRE5xi1IvQ5YEDHO6dg6ixG4wWOhcxN90F9x9mLp5oWO9Gh21_wR7S4891wgL9Y1m0Zc8oxR2ra8n_AJEDzvM</recordid><startdate>20110715</startdate><enddate>20110715</enddate><creator>LeBeau, Marc A</creator><creator>Montgomery, Madeline A</creator><creator>Brewer, Jason D</creator><general>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><general>Elsevier Sequoia S.A</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>L7M</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110715</creationdate><title>The role of variations in growth rate and sample collection on interpreting results of segmental analyses of hair</title><author>LeBeau, Marc A ; Montgomery, Madeline A ; Brewer, Jason D</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c542t-c3416bb60a821663096f5269a4a25c1017441ab04c3994ee2624dea7b84c15233</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Collection</topic><topic>Compliance</topic><topic>Cutting</topic><topic>Forensic medicine</topic><topic>Forensic science</topic><topic>Forensic sciences</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Growth rate</topic><topic>Hair</topic><topic>Hair - growth &amp; development</topic><topic>Hair analysis</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Pathology</topic><topic>Poisons</topic><topic>Professional Competence</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</topic><topic>Sampling</topic><topic>Segmental analysis</topic><topic>Segments</topic><topic>Sex crimes</topic><topic>Specimen Handling - methods</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Substance Abuse Detection - methods</topic><topic>Toys</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>LeBeau, Marc A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Montgomery, Madeline A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brewer, Jason D</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Proquest Nursing &amp; Allied Health Source</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><jtitle>Forensic science international</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>LeBeau, Marc A</au><au>Montgomery, Madeline A</au><au>Brewer, Jason D</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The role of variations in growth rate and sample collection on interpreting results of segmental analyses of hair</atitle><jtitle>Forensic science international</jtitle><addtitle>Forensic Sci Int</addtitle><date>2011-07-15</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>210</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>110</spage><epage>116</epage><pages>110-116</pages><issn>0379-0738</issn><eissn>1872-6283</eissn><coden>FSINDR</coden><abstract>Abstract Segmental analysis of hair for drugs, metabolites, and poisons has been widely reported in the scientific literature over the past two decades. Two fundamental assumptions in interpreting results of such analyses are (1) an average linear growth rate of head hair of 1 cm/month and (2) that sample collections occur with the hair being cut directly next to the scalp. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the variability associated with growth rate of human head hair, as well as the ability to uniformly collect hair next to the scalp. The results were used to determine how these factors affect the interpretation of results generated in segmental analysis of hair. A thorough literature review was conducted to assess the range of linear growth of human head hair from the vertex posterior and occipital regions. The results were compiled to establish the average (1.06 cm/month), as well as the range of possible growth rates of head hair. The range was remarkable and suggests that conclusions based on the 1-cm/month growth rate could be significantly skewed. A separate study was undertaken to evaluate collection of hair next to the scalp. Fourteen individuals were provided oral instructions, as well as a written standard collection procedure for head hair. The experience levels among the collectors varied from novice to expert. Each individual collected hair from dolls with short- and long-hair. Immediately following each collection, the sampling area was evaluated to determine how close to the scalp the cuts were made, as well as the variability in the lengths of hair remaining at the sampled area. From our collection study, we determined that 0.8 ± 0.1 cm of hair was left on the scalp after cutting. When taking into account the amount of hair left on the scalp after collecting, the use of a growth rate of 1.06 cm/month, and the assumption that it takes two weeks for newly formed hair in the follicle to reach the scalp, we find that the first 1-cm segment of hair typically corresponds to hair formed 1.3 ± 0.2 to 2.2 ± 0.4 months (95% confidence) earlier. The impact of these findings as it relates to the corresponding time for each additional segment is demonstrated. As a result, we recommend that hair collection be delayed 8 weeks after a suspected ingestion to ensure that the sample fully represents the exposure period. The results of this study suggest that the variability in the growth rate of human head hair, as well as the inconsistent collection of hair, significantly affect the interpretation of results from segmental analysis of hair.</abstract><cop>Kidlington</cop><pub>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</pub><pmid>21382678</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.02.015</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0379-0738
ispartof Forensic science international, 2011-07, Vol.210 (1), p.110-116
issn 0379-0738
1872-6283
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_901659465
source MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier); ProQuest Central UK/Ireland
subjects Biological and medical sciences
Collection
Compliance
Cutting
Forensic medicine
Forensic science
Forensic sciences
General aspects
Growth rate
Hair
Hair - growth & development
Hair analysis
Human
Humans
Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)
Medical sciences
Pathology
Poisons
Professional Competence
Public health. Hygiene
Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine
Sampling
Segmental analysis
Segments
Sex crimes
Specimen Handling - methods
Studies
Substance Abuse Detection - methods
Toys
title The role of variations in growth rate and sample collection on interpreting results of segmental analyses of hair
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-06T09%3A20%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20role%20of%20variations%20in%20growth%20rate%20and%20sample%20collection%20on%20interpreting%20results%20of%20segmental%20analyses%20of%20hair&rft.jtitle=Forensic%20science%20international&rft.au=LeBeau,%20Marc%20A&rft.date=2011-07-15&rft.volume=210&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=110&rft.epage=116&rft.pages=110-116&rft.issn=0379-0738&rft.eissn=1872-6283&rft.coden=FSINDR&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.02.015&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2398430561%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1034880065&rft_id=info:pmid/21382678&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0379073811000776&rfr_iscdi=true