ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2023
The scientific reinvention of forensic science.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current state: Assessing DNA results considering transfer.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
- Nothing new under the sun: The NIST primer on "Probability and Likelihood Ratios" gives a misleading negative portrayal of the likelihood-ratio framework.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Article
- An augmented evidence base for the interpretation of forensic text-based communications materials as intelligence and evidence.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Article
- Open source tools: an evaluation for digital forensic investigations.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2026Article
- DNA forensics at forty: the way forward.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Review
- Using Forensic Cases to Introduce First Year Pharmacy Students to Forensic Pharmacy and Strengthen Student Learning in Basic Sciences.Innovations in pharmacy · 2025Article
- From understanding to justifying: Computational reliabilism for AI-based forensic evidence evaluation.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2024Article
- Understanding 'error' in the forensic sciences: A primer.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2024Review
- An overview of log likelihood ratio cost in forensic science - Where is it used and what values can we expect?Forensic science international. Synergy · 2024Review
- Science, evidence, law, and justice.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Forensic science is undergoing an evolution in which a long-standing "trust the examiner" focus is being replaced by a "trust the scientific method" focus. This shift, which is in progress and still partial, is critical to ensure that the legal system uses forensic information in an accurate and valid way. In this Perspective, we discuss the ways in which the move to a more empirically grounded scientific culture for the forensic sciences impacts testing, error rate analyses, procedural safeguards, and the reporting of forensic results. However, we caution that the ultimate success of this scientific reinvention likely depends on whether the courts begin to engage with forensic science claims in a more rigorous way.
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.