Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37510390›Full record

ArticleGenes2023

Presence of Human DNA on Household Dogs and Its Bi-Directional Transfer.

Heidi Monkman, Bianca Szkuta, Roland A H van Oorschot

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Heidi MonkmanSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.
Bianca SzkutaSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2272-5355
Roland A H van OorschotOffice of the Chief Forensic Scientist, Victoria Police Forensic Services Department, Macleod 3085, Australia.
Deakin University · AUVictoria Police · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Awareness of the factors surrounding the transfer of DNA from a person, item, or surface to another person, item, or surface is highly relevant during investigations of alleged criminal activity. Animals in domestic environments could be a victim, offender, or innocent party associated with a crime. There is, however, very limited knowledge of human DNA transfer, persistence, prevalence, and recovery (DNA TPPR) associated with domestic animals. This pilot study aimed to improve our understanding of DNA TPPR associated with domestic dogs by collecting and analysing samples from various external areas of dogs of various breeds, interactions with humans, and living arrangements, and conducting a series of tests to investigate the possibility of dogs being vectors for the indirect transfer of human DNA. Reference DNA profiles from the dog owners and others living in the same residence were acquired to assist interpretation of the findings. The findings show that human DNA is prevalent on dogs, and in the majority of samples, two-person mixtures are present. Dogs were also found to be vectors for the transfer of human DNA, with DNA transferred from the dog to a gloved hand during patting and a sheet while walking.

Indexed as

Animals, DomesticDNA FingerprintingAnimalsDNADogsFamily CharacteristicsHumansPilot ProjectsDNADNA prevalenceDNA recoveryDNA transferdogsforensichuman DNA

Identifiers

PMID37510390
PMCPMC10379355
OpenAlexW4385226821

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.