Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38445266›Full record

ArticleForensic science international. Synergy2024

Towards ethical forensic practice: Undertaking research on biomaterials and applications for forensic science.

Johannes Hendrik Smith, Juanida Suzette Horne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Forensic science international. Synergy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Johannes Hendrik SmithSchool of Criminal Justice, University of South Africa, Preller St, Muckleneuk, Pretoria, 0002, South Africa.
Juanida Suzette HorneDepartment of Police Practice, School of Criminal Justice, College of Law, University of South Africa, Preller St, Muckleneuk, Pretoria, 0002, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The article by Maseme, Gardner and Mahomed discusses the need for clarifications and amendments to South Africa's legal framework, particularly the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA), 4 of 2013, which governs broad consent for biobank research. The authors emphasise the importance of addressing conflicts between POPIA and the ethical standards stipulated by the Department of Health. The article calls for collaboration between the forensic science community and the Academy of Science of South Africa, to develop a uniform code of conduct, as per the requirements of POPIA. The authors stress the imperative of a DNA statistical population profile database for diverse representation in forensic science. The article highlights the significance of voluntary informed consent and compliance with ISO/IEC 17025 standards, with a view to mitigating potential risks and ethical concerns.

Indexed as

BiobankBroad consentDNA population statistical databaseForensic sciencePOPIA

Identifiers

PMID38445266
PMCPMC10912828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.