ReviewInternational journal of legal medicine2018
Separation/extraction, detection, and interpretation of DNA mixtures in forensic science (review).
Review 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 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning-assisted analysis of saliva-containing mixtures using a saliva-specific multi-CpG-microhaplotype marker system.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Identification of the body fluid donors from mixture stains using bulk transcriptomes data.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Validation and forensic application of a new 36 X-chromosomal short tandem repeat loci multiplex system.Forensic sciences research · 2025Article
- Reducing DNA extraction costs through factorial design for the DNAdvance Kit.BMC research notes · 2024Article
- Solution to a case involving the interpretation of trace degraded DNA mixtures.International journal of legal medicine · 2024Article
- Modified differential lysis for sexual assault samples using a combined enzymatic and alkaline approach.Forensic sciences research · 2024Article
- Application of Y-STR, DIP-STR and SNP-STR Markers inIranian journal of public health · 2022Review
- Alternative direct-to-amplification sperm cell lysis techniques for sexual assault sample processing.Journal of forensic sciences · 2022Article
- A New Computational Deconvolution Algorithm for the Analysis of Forensic DNA Mixtures with SNP Markers.Genes · 2022Article
- Validation of the Investigator 24plex QS Kit: a 6-dye multiplex PCR assay for forensic application in the Chinese Han population.Forensic sciences research · 2022Article
- A novel computational strategy to predict the value of the evidence in the SNP-based forensic mixtures.PloS one · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Interpreting mixed DNA samples containing material from multiple contributors has long been considered a major challenge in forensic casework, especially when encountering low-template DNA (LT-DNA) or high-order mixtures that may involve missing alleles (dropout) and unrelated alleles (drop-in), among others. In the last decades, extraordinary progress has been made in the analysis of mixed DNA samples, which has led to increasing attention to this research field. The advent of new methods for the separation and extraction of DNA from mixtures, novel or jointly applied genetic markers for detection and reliable interpretation approaches for estimating the weight of evidence, as well as the powerful massively parallel sequencing (MPS) technology, has greatly extended the range of mixed samples that can be correctly analyzed. Here, we summarized the investigative approaches and progress in the field of forensic DNA mixture analysis, hoping to provide some assistance to forensic practitioners and to promote further development involving this issue.
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.