ArticleJournal of forensic sciences2022
Detailing the process of identifying and the outcomes of efforts to address lawfully "owed" DNA.
Article in Journal of forensic sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- From 15,000 to near zero: Cuyahoga County's eight-year effort to address lawfully "owed" DNA.Journal of forensic sciences · 2026Article
- Detailing the process of identifying and the outcomes of efforts to address lawfully "owed" DNA.Journal of forensic sciences · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
While missed DNA sample collection has been an identified problem for decades, there has yet to be a scholarly publication related to a large-scale effort to address lawfully "owed" DNA outside of a prison system. Lawfully owed DNA samples are DNA samples that legally should have been collected and entered into Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) based upon a qualifying offense but were not. As the first jurisdiction funded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance's Sexual Assault Kit Initiative to address lawfully owed DNA, this case study fills this knowledge gap by answering four key questions: What was the scope of the problem in this jurisdiction? What was the process by which individuals who owe were identified? What were the outcomes of these efforts? And what were the lessons learned and recommendations for other jurisdictions? Findings from this case study indicate widespread DNA sample collection issues in this jurisdiction, with nearly 15,000 identified as owing DNA over the span of approximately 7 years. Efforts to collect lawfully owed DNA samples from those who owe over a duration of approximately five and a half years have resulted in about one-fifth now being in CODIS, about 4% of these newly collected DNA profiles resulted in a forensic hit, and a quarter of those hits have resulted in a prosecution. This study serves as an important blueprint for other jurisdictions and underscores the importance of having effective policies and practices to help ensure that all who should lawfully have their DNA collected and uploaded into CODIS do.
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.