Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36031058›Full record

ReviewGenomics, proteomics & bioinformatics2023

Application of Microbiome in Forensics.

Jun Zhang, Wenli Liu, Halimureti Simayijiang, Ping Hu, Jiangwei Yan

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. DNA forensics at forty: the way forward.International journal of legal medicine · 2025
    Review
  9. RedefiningFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jun ZhangSchool of Forensic Medicine, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, China.
Wenli LiuBeijing Center for Physical and Chemical Analysis, Beijing 100089, China.
Halimureti SimayijiangSchool of Forensic Medicine, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, China.
Ping HuKey Laboratory of Environment and Health (HUST), Ministry of Education & Ministry of Environmental Protection, and State Key Laboratory of Environmental Health (Incubation), School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China. Electronic address: pinghu@hust.edu.cn.
Jiangwei YanSchool of Forensic Medicine, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, China. Electronic address: yanjw@sxmu.edu.cn.
Shanxi Medical University · CNBeijing Academy of Science and Technology · CNMinistry of Ecology and Environment · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances in next-generation sequencing technologies and improvements in bioinformatics have expanded the scope of microbiome analysis as a forensic tool. Microbiome research is concerned with the study of the compositional profile and diversity of microbial flora as well as the interactions between microbes, hosts, and the environment. It has opened up many new possibilities for forensic analysis. In this review, we discuss various applications of microbiome in forensics, including identification of individuals, geolocation inference, and post-mortem interval (PMI) estimation.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaComputational BiologyHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansApplicationBioinformaticsForensicsMicrobiomeNext-generation sequencing

Identifiers

PMID36031058
PMCPMC10372919
OpenAlexW4293560501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.