ArticleForensic science international. Synergy2024
ENFSI 2022 multidisciplinary collaborative exercise: organisation and outcomes.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interpol review of fingermark composition and visualization 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
- New trends and approaches in the voltammetric analysis of gunshot residue.Mikrochimica acta · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of collaborative exercises (CE) and proficiency tests (PT) as part of the governance programme for any forensic science laboratory has become commonplace and recommended by several international organisations. Traditionally these have been discipline-specific exercises testing a laboratory's ability in a single area of forensic science. However, the "real" world is normally more complex and, in many instances, forensic material must be examined for a number of different evidence types. This article summarises the concepts, planning, design, preparation, implementation, co-ordination and evaluation of the 2022 Multidisciplinary Collaborative Exercise (2022-MdCE) covering a range of forensic disciplines, specifically DNA, fingerprint, documents and handwriting. The exercise consisted of a questioned letter with typescript text and a signature. In addition, the letter contained a visible bloody fingermark in the area of the signature, a visible staining in the lower left-hand corner, a latent fingermark and an indented impression. The analysis of the results showed that, in the investigation of the bloody fingermark, the priority was given to the DNA examination. Some critical issues emerged in relation to the biological (DNA)/ink sampling strategies when applied before fingermark visualisation. Another outcome of the exercise has been to demonstrate the importance of indented impressions, which have been underestimated by a significant number of participants. As setters, more in-depth studies are needed to produce consistent samples. This concerns all the disciplined involved but especially DNA and fingermarks. Based on this exercise, it is believed that this approach to testing of forensic disciplines allows the analysis of good practice within the various scientific areas, as well as scrutinising the process and sequence of events for examining the material within a forensic laboratory in the best conservative way for all kind of evidences.
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.