Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36057692›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2022

A prospective cost-benefit analysis for nylon 4N6FLOQSwabs®: example of the process and potential benefits.

Bruce Budowle, Jianye Ge, Antti Sajantila

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 52% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Bruce BudowleDepartment of Forensic Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. b.budowle@att.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4116-2930
Jianye GeCenter for Human Identification, Health Science Center, University of North Texas, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Antti SajantilaDepartment of Forensic Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
University of Helsinki · FIUniversity of North Texas · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Laboratories and their criminal justice systems are confronted with challenges for implementing new technologies, practices, and policies even when there appears to be demonstrative benefits to operational performance. Impacting decisions are the often higher costs associated with, for example, new technologies, limited current budgets, and making hard decisions on what to sacrifice to take on the seemingly better approach. A prospective cost-benefit analysis (CBA) could help an agency better formulate its strategies and plans and more importantly delineate how a relatively small increase to take on, for example, a new technology can have large impact on the system (e.g., the agency, other agencies, victims and families, and taxpayers). To demonstrate the process and potential value a CBA was performed on the use of an alternate and more expensive swab with reported better DNA yield and being certified human DNA free (i.e., nylon 4N6FLOQSwabs®), versus the traditional less costly swab (i.e., cotton swab). Assumptions are described, potential underestimates and overestimates noted, different values applied (for low and modest to high), and potential benefits (monetary and qualitative) presented. The overall outcome is that the cost of using the more expensive technology pales compared with the potential tangible and intangible benefits. This approach could be a guide for laboratories (and associated criminal justice systems) worldwide to support increased funding, although the costs and benefits may vary locally and for different technologies, practices, and policies. With well-developed CBAs, goals of providing the best services to support the criminal justice system and society can be attained.

Indexed as

NylonsCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansProspective StudiesNylonsCost–benefit analysisCotton swabDatabaseForensic genomicsNylon 4N6FLOQSwabs®RapeSexual assaultTangible and intangible benefits

Identifiers

PMID36057692
PMCPMC9576645
OpenAlexW4294539201

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.