ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2021
Analytical validation of an RI sample cartridge with the RapidHIT® ID system.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2021. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review on Commercially Available Integrated Systems for Forensic DNA Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Solution to a case involving the interpretation of trace degraded DNA mixtures.International journal of legal medicine · 2024Article
- Human complex mixture analysis by "FD Multi-SNP Mixture Kit".Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Application of RapidHIT™ ID for cell authentication by fast and convenient STR profiling.Genes & genomics · 2023Article
- Recent advances in forensic biology and forensic DNA typing: INTERPOL review 2019-2022.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2023Article
- Investigation on the genetic-inconsistent paternity cases using the MiSeq FGx system.Forensic sciences research · 2022Article
- Validation of the Applied Biosystems RapidHIT ID instrument and ACE GlobalFiler Express sample cartridge.International journal of legal medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Evaluating the short tandem repeat (STR) in the field is important for the timely identification of a suspect. Several lines showed that the RapidHIT® ID system is reliable for DNA genotyping with buccal swabs and naked DNA. However, the application of this approach with blood samples has been poorly investigated. Because blood samples are among the most common forensic samples in our laboratory, further studies should be conducted. Here, we assessed the analytical performance of 19 STR loci with a newly developed RapidINTEL (RI) Sample Cartridge Kit by using the blood samples with known genotypes. Several commonly used substrates were included in the sensitivity study, and FTA cards proved to be the most promising sample carrier for blood storage and later identification. There was superior sensitivity and specificity with a 100% concordance rate for 0.5 μL of blood or 7 ng of genomic DNA. The performance for blood samples was comparable with that for the standard protocol. High success rate (90.57%) and high-concordance (100%) genotyping were automatically achieved over a wide range of operating conditions except for TH01. No contamination was observed throughout the study. Hematin, indigo, and humic acid had limited influence on the instrument system, while urea and melanin dramatically affected the genotyping results. Generally, the newly developed RI sample cartridge provided an alternative method for the STR genotyping of single-source blood samples over a wide range of operating conditions.
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.