↓ Skip to main content

Prediction of designer drugs: synthesis and spectroscopic analysis of synthetic cannabinoid analogues of 1H-indol-3-yl(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone and 1H-indol-3-yl(adamantan-1-yl)methanon…

Overview of attention for article published in Drug Testing and Analysis, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
4 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Prediction of designer drugs: synthesis and spectroscopic analysis of synthetic cannabinoid analogues of 1H-indol-3-yl(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone and 1H-indol-3-yl(adamantan-1-yl)methanone.
Published in
Drug Testing and Analysis, November 2015
DOI 10.1002/dta.1904
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlsson, Andreas, Lindberg, Sandra, Wu, Xiongyu, Dunne, Simon, Josefsson, Martin, Åstot, Crister, Dahlén, Johan

Abstract

In this work, emergence patterns of synthetic cannabinoids were utilized in an attempt to predict those that may appear on the drug market in the future. Based on this information, two base structures of the synthetic cannabinoid analogues - (1H-indol-3-yl(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone and 1H-indol-3-yl(adamantan-1-yl)methanone) - together with three substituents - butyl, 4-fluorobutyl and ethyl tetrahydropyran - were selected for synthesis. This resulted in a total of six synthetic cannabinoid analogues that to the authors' knowledge have not yet appeared on the drug market. Spectroscopic data, including nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), mass spectrometry (MS), and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy (solid and gas phase), are presented for the synthesized analogues and some additional related cannabinoids. In this context, the suitability of the employed techniques for the identification of unknowns is discussed and the use of GC-FTIR as a secondary complementary technique to GC-MS is addressed. Examples of compounds that are difficult to differentiate by their mass spectra, but can be distinguished based upon their gas phase FTIR spectra are presented. Conversely, structural homologues where mass spectra are more powerful than gas phase FTIR spectra for unambiguous assignments are also exemplified. This work further emphasizes that a combination of several techniques is the key to success in structural elucidations. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 25%
Brazil 1 25%
Unknown 2 50%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 1 25%
Student > Master 1 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 25%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 25%
Chemistry 1 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 November 2015.
All research outputs
#4,831,088
of 6,532,138 outputs
Outputs from Drug Testing and Analysis
#322
of 425 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,842
of 209,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Testing and Analysis
#7
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,532,138 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 425 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 209,371 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.