Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37824498›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Preliminary assessment of three quantitative approaches for estimating time-since-deposition from autofluorescence and morphological profiles of cell populations from forensic biological samples.

Amanda Elswick Gentry, Sarah Ingram, M Katherine Philpott, Kellie J Archer, Christopher J Ehrhardt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

5 authors.

Amanda Elswick GentryVirginia Institute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-6425-9340
Sarah IngramDepartment of Forensic Science, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, United States of America.
M Katherine PhilpottDepartment of Forensic Science, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, United States of America.
Kellie J ArcherDivision of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Christopher J EhrhardtDepartment of Forensic Science, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, United States of America.

Funding

Virus Vector Shared ResourceP30CA016059 · NCI · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI Keri R Maher · 1985 to 2026
$51.0M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016059
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Determining when DNA recovered from a crime scene transferred from its biological source, i.e., a sample's 'time-since-deposition' (TSD), can provide critical context for biological evidence. Yet, there remains no analytical techniques for TSD that are validated for forensic casework. In this study, we investigate whether morphological and autofluorescence measurements of forensically-relevant cell populations generated with Imaging Flow Cytometry (IFC) can be used to predict the TSD of 'touch' or trace biological samples. To this end, three different prediction frameworks for estimating the number of day(s) for TSD were evaluated: the elastic net, gradient boosting machines (GBM), and generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) LASSO. Additionally, we transformed these continuous predictions into a series of binary classifiers to evaluate the potential utility for forensic casework. Results showed that GBM and GLMM-LASSO showed the highest accuracy, with mean absolute error estimates in a hold-out test set of 29 and 21 days, respectively. Binary classifiers for these models correctly binned 94-96% and 98-99% of the age estimates as over/under 7 or 180 days, respectively. This suggests that predicted TSD using IFC measurements coupled to one or, possibly, a combination binary classification decision rules, may provide probative information for trace biological samples encountered during forensic casework.

Indexed as

DNAForensic MedicineFlow CytometryPolymorphism, Single NucleotideDNA

Identifiers

PMID37824498
PMCPMC10569564

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.