Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21331090›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2011

Improving human forensics through advances in genetics, genomics and molecular biology.

Manfred Kayser, Peter de Knijff

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 153 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
153citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

153 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Forensic genetics in the omics era.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

93 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Manfred KayserDepartment of Forensic Molecular Biology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands. m.kayser@erasmusmc.nl
Peter de Knijff

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Forensic DNA profiling currently allows the identification of persons already known to investigating authorities. Recent advances have produced new types of genetic markers with the potential to overcome some important limitations of current DNA profiling methods. Moreover, other developments are enabling completely new kinds of forensically relevant information to be extracted from biological samples. These include new molecular approaches for finding individuals previously unknown to investigators, and new molecular methods to support links between forensic sample donors and criminal acts. Such advances in genetics, genomics and molecular biology are likely to improve human forensic case work in the near future.

Indexed as

GenomicsDatabases, GeneticDNA FingerprintingFemaleForensic MedicineGenetic MarkersHumansMaleGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID21331090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.