ReviewGenes & genomics2023
Forensic biogeographical ancestry inference: recent insights and current trends.
Review in Genes & genomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Large-scale human genomic resources drive innovations toward forensic intelligent source attribution and precision identification.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Review
- Genetic structure analysis of a Northwest Chinese population using a self-developed DIP system and machine learning for forensic ancestry inference.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- Predicting Physical Appearance from Low Template: State of the Art and Future Perspectives.Genes · 2026Review
- Assessment of a microhaplotype panel for human identification and ancestry inference in Brazil.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Article
- Bioinformatic insights into five Chinese population substructures inferred from the East Asian-specific AISNP panel.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Investigation ofTurkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2024Article
- Current issues in forensic genetics.Genes & genomics · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs a powerful complement to the paradigmatic DNA profiling strategy, biogeographical ancestry inference (BGAI) plays a significant part in human forensic investigation especially when a database hit or eyewitness testimony are not available. It indicates one's biogeographical profile based on known population-specific genetic variations, and thus is crucial for guiding authority investigations to find unknown individuals. Forensic biogeographical ancestry testing exploits much of the recent advances in the understanding of human genomic variation and improving of molecular biology.
objectiveIn this review, recent development of prospective ancestry informative markers (AIMs) and the statistical approaches of inferring biogeographic ancestry from AIMs are elucidated and discussed.
methodsWe highlight the research progress of three potential AIMs (i.e., single nucleotide polymorphisms, microhaplotypes, and Y or mtDNA uniparental markers) and discuss the prospects and challenges of two methods that are commonly used in BGAI.
conclusionWhile BGAI for forensic purposes has been thriving in recent years, important challenges, such as ethics and responsibilities, data completeness, and ununified standards for evaluation, remain for the use of biogeographical ancestry information in human forensic investigations. To address these issues and fully realize the value of BGAI in forensic investigation, efforts should be made not only by labs/institutions around the world independently, but also by inter-lab/institution collaborations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37081293What 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.