ArticleMolecular genetics & genomic medicine2021
Concordance and characterization of massively parallel sequencing at 58 STRs in a Tibetan population.
Article in Molecular genetics & genomic medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Population genetic analyses of Eastern Chinese Han nationality using ForenSeq™ DNA Signature Prep Kit.Molecular genetics and genomics : MGG · 2024Article
- Concordance study on Y-STRs typing between SeqStudio™ genetic analyzer for HID and MiSeq™ FGx forensic genomics system.Molecular biology reports · 2023Article
- Sequence-based mutation patterns at 41 Y chromosomal STRs in 2 548 father-son pairs.Forensic sciences research · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a novel 133-plex forensic STR panel (52 STRs and 81 Y-STRs) using single-end 400 bp massive parallel sequencing.International journal of legal medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2024-02-12Concerns/Issues about Data · Informed/Patient Consent - None/Withdrawn · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Investigation by Third Party · Lack of Approval from Author · Lack of IRB/IACUC Approval and/or Compliance · Objections by Author(s) · · see also: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41431-025-01847-4
- Retracted
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMassively parallel sequencing (MPS) is a promising supplementary method for forensic casework in short tandem repeats (STRs) genotyping, owing to several advantageous features in comparison to traditional capillary electrophoresis (CE). However, the application of MPS in casework requires accessible datasets from the worldwide population to enrich the allele frequencies of sequence-based STR genotypes.
methodsIn this study, we report the characterization of sequence-based allele frequencies of 58 STRs from a Tibetan population comprising 120 unrelated individuals using the ForenSeq™ DNA Signature Prep Kit. A concordance study evaluating MPS and CE allele data was performed to ensure that MPS is compatible with current CE-based forensic databases. The diversity of observed alleles, allele frequencies, and forensic parameters per locus by length (LB), sequence without flanking region (RSB), and sequence with flanking region (FSB) were analyzed and compared.
resultsThe concordance study demonstrated a concordance rate exceeding 99%. The combined random match probability (RMP) for the 26 A-STRs was 2.04 × 10
conclusionsOur data suggest that MPS- and CE-derived alleles are compatible. MPS-based analysis of the STR data substantially increased the allele diversity and improved the forensic parameters, which clearly demonstrated the advantages of MPS in comparison to CE. With more pooled data and larger-scale validation, MPS could play a valuable role in forensic genetics and might be an additional tool for routine casework.
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.