Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39188354›Full record

ArticleForensic science international. Synergy2024

A template Bayesian network for combining forensic evidence on an item with an uncertain relation to the disputed activities.

M Vink, J A de Koeijer, M J Sjerps

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. Using all available evidence to solve kinship cases.International journal of legal medicine · 2026
    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

3 authors.

M VinkUniversity of Amsterdam, KdVI, PO Box 94248, 1090 GE, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
J A de KoeijerNetherlands Forensic Institute, Laan van Ypenburg 6, 2497GB, The Hague, the Netherlands.
M J SjerpsUniversity of Amsterdam, KdVI, PO Box 94248, 1090 GE, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most of the forensic evidence evaluations given activity level propositions are centered around an item which is assumed to be linked to an alleged activity. However, the relation between an item of interest and an activity may be contested. This study presents a template Bayesian network (BN) for the evaluation of transfer evidence given activity level propositions considering a dispute about the relation of an item to one or more activities. The template BN includes a set of association propositions that enables the combined evaluation of evidence concerning alleged activities of the suspect and evidence concerning the use of an alleged item in those activities. Since the two types of evidence are often from different forensic disciplines, the BN is especially useful in interdisciplinary casework. Throughout the paper, we use a fictive case example that captures the essence of cases for which the template model can be used. The template BN provides a flexible starting point that can be adapted to specific case situations and supports structured probabilistic reasoning by a forensic scientist.

Indexed as

Activity levelAssociation propositionsBayesian networksCombining evidenceForensic scienceInterdisciplinary casework

Identifiers

PMID39188354
PMCPMC11345578

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.