ReviewForensic sciences research2025
Forensic DNA phenotyping: a review on SNP panels, genotyping techniques, and prediction models.
Review in Forensic sciences research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the use of molecular markers for the prediction of human facial features for forensic purposes: a systematic review.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Review
- GenoEye: A machine learning-based framework for the prediction of intermediate eye color phenotypes.Journal of forensic sciences · 2026Article
- Ancestry estimation: Methodological evolution and forensic implications.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2026Review
- Recovery and analysis of ancient DNA: challenges, methods, and applications in forensic and archaeological science.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2026Article
- Performance of the ForenSeqGenes · 2026Article
- Predicting Physical Appearance from Low Template: State of the Art and Future Perspectives.Genes · 2026Review
- Review
- Article
- Forensic DNA Phenotyping: Examining knowledge and operational view from police officers.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2025Article
- Facing the Unknown: Integration of Skeletal Traits, Genetic Information and Forensic Facial Approximation.Genes · 2025Article
- Ethnogenetic analysis reveals the Bronze Age genetic affiliation of Yashkuns with West Eurasians.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the past few years, forensic DNA phenotyping has attracted a strong interest in the forensic research. Among the increasing publications, many have focused on testing the available panels to infer biogeographical ancestry on less represented populations and understanding the genetic mechanisms underlying externally visible characteristics. However, there are currently no publications that gather all the existing panels limited to forensic DNA phenotyping and discuss the main technical limitations of the technique. In this review, we performed a bibliographic search in Scopus database of phenotyping-related literature, which resulted in a total of 48, 43, and 15 panels for biogeographical ancestry, externally visible characteristics, and both traits inference, respectively. Here we provide a list of commercial and non-commercial panels and the limitations regarding the lack of harmonization in terms of terminology (i.e., categorization and measurement of traits) and reporting, the lack of genetic knowledge and environment influence to select markers and develop panels, and the debate surrounding the selection of genotyping technologies and prediction models and algorithms. In conclusion, this review aims to be an updated guide and to present an overview of the current related literature.
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.