ReviewGenes2022
A Logical Framework for Forensic DNA Interpretation.
Review in Genes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current state: Assessing DNA results considering transfer.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
- Medical findings in young patients with head trauma: How strong is the evidence for abuse?International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Single-cell deoxyribonucleic acid typing for forensic mixtures and trace evidence: Opportunities, validation requirements, and reporting limits.World journal of biological chemistry · 2026Review
- Forensic trace DNA analysis to answer activity-level questions in a realistic-scenario activity study based upon the case of Idaho v Bryan C. Kohberger.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Article
- Predicting Physical Appearance from Low Template: State of the Art and Future Perspectives.Genes · 2026Review
- Finding the Prevalence of Autism in Female Mental Illness: Improving Child Development for an Underdiagnosed and Undertreated Population.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Error mitigation in forensic handwriting examination: the examiner's perspective.Forensic sciences research · 2024Review
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The forensic community has devoted much effort over the last decades to the development of a logical framework for forensic interpretation, which is essential for the safe administration of justice. We review the research and guidelines that have been published and provide examples of how to implement them in casework. After a discussion on uncertainty in the criminal trial and the roles that the DNA scientist may take, we present the principles of interpretation for evaluative reporting. We show how their application helps to avoid a common fallacy and present strategies that DNA scientists can apply so that they do not transpose the conditional. We then discuss the hierarchy of propositions and explain why it is considered a fundamental concept for the evaluation of biological results and the differences between assessing results given propositions that are at the source level or the activity level. We show the importance of pre-assessment, especially when the questions relate to the alleged activities, and when transfer and persistence need to be considered by the scientists to guide the court. We conclude with a discussion on statement writing and testimony. This provides guidance on how DNA scientists can report in a balanced, transparent, and logical way.
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.