ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2013
The new guidelines for paternity analysis in Germany-how many STR loci are necessary when investigating duo cases?
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of Probabilistic Genotyping Software to Paternity Cases Involving Low-Template DNA.Genes · 2026Article
- Article
- Analysis of data and common mutations encountered during routine parentage testing in Zimbabwe.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- An evaluation of the SureID 23comp Human Identification Kit for kinship testing.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Letter to the Editor: comments on biostatistical power of sibling analysis by STR markers.International journal of legal medicine · 2016Article
- Does zero really mean nothing?-first experiences with the new PowerQuant(TM) system in comparison to established real-time quantification kits.International journal of legal medicine · 2016Article
- About the power of biostatistics in sibling analysis-comparison of empirical and simulated data.International journal of legal medicine · 2015Article
- Global population variability in Promega PowerPlex CS7, D6S1043, and Penta B STRs.International journal of legal medicine · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The requirements in the new German guidelines for paternity analysis have not only changed according to the so-called Gendiagnostikgesetz, the new German law regulating human genetic as well as paternity analyses, but also regarding the minimal number of short tandem repeats (STRs) which should be investigated (15 STRs) and the minimal required average exclusion chance (99.999 %). Even in paternity analyses involving only two people (e.g., father and child or mother and child), this exclusion chance is mandatory. A retrospective analysis of 330 father-child cases from our routine investigations showed in 142 cases (43 %) an individual exclusion chance below 99.999 % when using 15 STRs as required, in our routine work provided by the Powerplex® 16 kit which is reported to have an average exclusion chance of 99.988 %. Therefore, these same 330 father-child pairs were additionally analysed using the Powerplex® 21 kit and 120 of these duos were additionally analysed using the Powerplex® ESX17 kit enabling the analysis of 20 or 16 loci respectively. Now, an individual exclusion chance of more than 99.999 % could be achieved in 95.5 % (Powerplex® 21; calculation without the results of D6S1043), 98.8 % (Powerplex® 21; calculation with the results of D6S1043, using allele frequencies established in this study for a German and a West African population) and 98.3 % (Powerplex® ESX17). These data clearly demonstrate that in duo cases, more than the required 15 STR loci have to be investigated to obtain sufficient results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.