ArticleScientific reports2019
Touch DNA: impact of handling time on touch deposit and evaluation of different recovery techniques: An experimental study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.
- Touch DNA Sampling Methods: Efficacy Evaluation and Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Pooled it
- The comparison of excision, swabbing, tape-lifting, and scraping as techniques for DNA evidence recovery: A preliminary study.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Article
- Predicting Physical Appearance from Low Template: State of the Art and Future Perspectives.Genes · 2026Review
- Comparative analysis of DNA collection techniques applied to disposable 3-layer earloop face masks.Forensic sciences research · 2025Article
- Impact of liquid antibacterial soap and hand sanitizer on DNA transfer in forensic investigations: an experimental study.Forensic sciences research · 2025Article
- Enhancing trace DNA profile recovery in forensic casework using the amplicon RX post-PCR clean-up kit.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Detection of invisible biological traces in relation to the physicochemical properties of substrates surfaces in forensic casework.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparison of swabbing and cutting-out DNA collection methods from cotton, paper, and cardboard surfaces.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2024Article
- Review
- Targeting cell-derived markers to improve the detection of invisible biological traces for the purpose of genetic-based criminal identification.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Systematic Review of Penetrating Cardiac Injury by a Firearm: Forensic Implications.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Recent advances in forensic biology and forensic DNA typing: INTERPOL review 2019-2022.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2023Article
- DNA recovery after sequential processing of latent fingerprints on copy paper.Journal of forensic sciences · 2022Article
- Review
- Current Methods for Body Fluid Identification Related to Sexual Crime: Focusing on Saliva, Semen, and Vaginal Fluid.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
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
"Touch DNA" is DNA obtained from biological material transferred from a donor to an object or a person during physical contact. This particular kind of evidence could play an essential role in forensic laboratory work and is considered an important tool for investigators. Even though the principal aspects of "Touch DNA" have been extensively studied, to date, there are few reports in the research field of DNA retrieval from garments that have been worn. This study aimed to investigate the "handling time", analyzing particularly the minimum contact time required to deposit a sufficient amount of DNA on a garment to produce an interpretable profile of the "handler". Moreover, three different sampling techniques were compared ("dry swab", "cutting out", and "adhesive tape") with the aim of defining the technique that guarantees the best recovery of the three methods tested. Analyzing the data of this experimental model, a "handling time" of two seconds is enough to release sufficient DNA on to a garment to obtain a complete profile. Moreover, this study demonstrated that when targeting for foreign DNA, the sample area should be narrowed down as much as possible to the smallest area possible to maximize target DNA recovery.
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.