ArticleJournal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFP
Quantification of DNA, in dried blood, saliva tinged with blood in comparision with fresh blood for forensic identification- A pilot study.
Article in Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFP. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The important tenet of forensic science is personal identification based on DNA studies. The use of DNA has changed the specificity and sensitivity of victim identity tests associated with criminology, trauma, and natural disasters in Forensic Science. Blood is a proven source of DNA quantification for these analyses. The use of saliva, which can be acquired more easily in a simple and atraumatic method is gaining preference; as some of its advantages include - collection of larger sample numbers, easy replication of tests in duplicates and triplicates, and repetitions if advocated, can easily be performed. Though it yields a comparatively slightly lesser quantity of DNA, some of the samples - like dried blood and blood-tinged saliva, have the potential to be used in forensic sciences and provide a better result than simple saliva. Such samples are valuable sources of genetic material that can be utilized in crime and forensic investigations. The present study is one of few studies to be explored in this sphere as very few studies using blood-tinged saliva and dried blood have been conducted so far. Aims and Objectives: To determine if blood-tinged saliva or dried blood yields a good amount of DNA. To compare it with fresh blood samples for authentication. Materials and Methodology: The study groups: Group A - Results: The extracted DNA was quantified and the yield was 83.3 ± 9.4, 55.1 ± 7.4, and 73.4 ± 8.7 μg/ml in fresh blood, dried blood, and blood-tinged saliva, respectively. Out of the 60 samples assessed, all 100% samples yielded a sufficiently good DNA content. Extraction from Blood tinged with saliva showed promising results when compared to dried blood and the levels obtained were closely comparable to whole blood (fresh). Conclusion: Blood is a standard sample for ample DNA yields in forensic studies. We conclude in this study, that blood-tinged saliva gives an equally good sample for utilization in DNA detection in those situations where such samples are traced (even at a later date) at the scene of crime, or mass disasters for forensic analysis.
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.