Marker evaluation for differentiation of blood and menstrual fluid by methylation-sensitive SNaPshot analysis.

Hannah Holtkötter, Kristina Schwender, Peter Wiegand, Heidi Pfeiffer, Marielle Vennemann

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

1citing papers in PubMed

–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

Developments in forensic DNA analysis.Emerging topics in life sciences · 2021
Review

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

5 authors.

Hannah HoltkötterInstitute of Legal Medicine, University of Münster, Röntgenstraße 23, 48149, Münster, Germany. hannah.holtkoetter@ukmuenster.de.

Kristina SchwenderInstitute of Legal Medicine, University of Münster, Röntgenstraße 23, 48149, Münster, Germany.

Peter WiegandInstitute of Legal Medicine, University of Ulm, Albert-Einstein-Allee 11, 89081, Ulm, Germany.

Heidi PfeifferInstitute of Legal Medicine, University of Münster, Röntgenstraße 23, 48149, Münster, Germany.

Marielle VennemannInstitute of Legal Medicine, University of Münster, Röntgenstraße 23, 48149, Münster, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The differentiation of blood and menstrual fluid is especially important in cases of alleged sexual assault. While the identification of blood is relatively straightforward, the identification of menstrual fluid in trace evidence has been shown to be more challenging. This may be due to the complex nature of menstrual fluid that leads to intra- and inter-individual differences in composition. Nevertheless, recent advances in DNA methylation profiling have revealed promising markers for the differentiation of the two body fluids and furthermore, markers to distinguish menstrual fluid from vaginal fluid. A literature study was performed and in total, 11 markers were evaluated in this study of which seven could be validated for menstrual fluid and blood identification purposes. Marker "BLU2" (chr16:29757334) was identified as most suitable for differentiation of blood and menstrual fluid.

Indexed as

Blood Chemical AnalysisDNA MethylationGenetic MarkersMenstruationAdultCervix MucusCpG IslandsDNAFemaleGenotyping TechniquesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMouth MucosaPolymerase Chain ReactionSalivaDNAGenetic MarkersBloodBody fluidsDNA methylationEpigenetic markersMenstrual fluidVaginal secretions

Identifiers

PMID29372322

DOI10.1007/s00414-018-1770-3

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.