ArticlePloS one2015
Investigation of the Application of miR10b and miR135b in the Identification of Semen Stains.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in body fluid identification: MiRNA markers as powerful tool.International journal of legal medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Application of RNA markers in forensic body fluid analysis: from specificity and stability to polymorphism.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Review
- Evaluation of extraction methods for co-isolation of nucleic acid from human saliva for forensic body fluid identification.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Analysis of MiR-20b, MIR-197 markers for differentiation between forensic body fluids encountered in sexual assault cases.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2025Article
- The potential of using non-coding RNAs in forensic science applications.Forensic sciences research · 2023Review
- Article
- MicroRNAs: An Update of Applications in Forensic Science.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the identification method using the microRNA markers miR10b and miR135b to distinguish semen stains from menstrual blood, peripheral blood, vaginal fluid and so on body fluid stains. The expression levels of miR10b and miR35b in semen stains and menstrual blood and so on were detected utilizing a real-time quantitative PCR technique with a specific fluorescence-labeled TaqMan probe. RNU6b was used as the internal reference gene; the difference in their expression was analyzed, and the specificity, sensitivity, and detection capability of the techniques were evaluated. The expression of miR10b and miR135b in semen stains was significantly higher than that of other body fluid stains, with a mean value of ΔCт from-6 to-7. However, it ranged from-2 to-4 for other body fluid stains. The initial criteria for judging which semen stains can be identified were determined by analyzing the research results. When the threshold value was set to 0.04, the CT value could be detected in the target genes miR10b, miR135b and in the internal reference gene RNU6b, and CT values are<40, ΔCT[10b-U6]<-5.5, and ΔCT[135b-U6]<-6, respectively, and the semen stain could be identified. The expression levels of miR10b and miR135b are higher in semen with strong tissue specificity; thus, they can be used to differentiate semen stains from other body fluid stains in forensic science.
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.