Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37341834›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2023

A cost-benefit analysis for use of large SNP panels and high throughput typing for forensic investigative genetic genealogy.

Bruce Budowle, Andrew Arnette, Antti Sajantila

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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.

Bruce BudowleDepartment of Forensic Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. b.budowle@att.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4116-2930
Andrew ArnetteDepartment of Business Information Technology, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA.
Antti SajantilaDepartment of Forensic Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Next-generation sequencing (NGS), also known as massively sequencing, enables large dense SNP panel analyses which generate the genetic component of forensic investigative genetic genealogy (FIGG). While the costs of implementing large SNP panel analyses into the laboratory system may seem high and daunting, the benefits of the technology may more than justify the investment. To determine if an infrastructural investment in public laboratories and using large SNP panel analyses would reap substantial benefits to society, a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) was performed. This CBA applied the logic that an increase of DNA profile uploads to a DNA database due to a sheer increase in number of markers and a greater sensitivity of detection afforded with NGS and a higher hit/association rate due to large SNP/kinship resolution and genealogy will increase investigative leads, will be more effective for identifying recidivists which in turn reduces future victims of crime, and will bring greater safety and security to communities. Analyses were performed for worst case/best case scenarios as well as by simulation sampling the range spaces with multiple input values simultaneously to generate best estimate summary statistics. This study shows that the benefits, both tangible and intangible, over the lifetime of an advanced database system would be huge and can be projected to be for less than $1 billion per year (over a 10-year period) investment can reap on average > $4.8 billion in tangible and intangible cost-benefits per year. More importantly, on average > 50,000 individuals need not become victims if FIGG were employed, assuming investigative associations generated were acted upon. The benefit to society is immense making the laboratory investment a nominal cost. The benefits likely are underestimated herein. There is latitude in the estimated costs, and even if they were doubled or tripled, there would still be substantial benefits gained with a FIGG-based approach. While the data used in this CBA are US centric (primarily because data were readily accessible), the model is generalizable and could be used by other jurisdictions to perform relevant and representative CBAs.

Indexed as

DNADNA FingerprintingCost-Benefit AnalysisCrimeHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansPolymorphism, Single NucleotideDNACost–benefit analysisDatabaseForensic investigative genetic genealogyIntangible benefitsSNPsTangible benefits

Identifiers

PMID37341834
PMCPMC10421786

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.