Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40369772›Full record

ArticleJournal of forensic sciences2025

Simple and nondestructive method to access and process material on coverslipped slides.

Natalia Pedraza, Michael A Marciano

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of forensic sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Natalia PedrazaForensic & National Security Sciences Institute, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA.
Michael A MarcianoForensic & National Security Sciences Institute, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8370-7850

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The highly limiting nature of forensic evidence can, many times, force investigators and scientists to access nonoptimal sources of evidence such as slides from sexual assault evidence collection kits or archival slides from autopsies or hospital visits. These slides may contain hair, cells, fibers, or other physical evidence that are trapped in coverslipping media and are difficult to access. Methods to remove coverslips and access this material have been historically undertaken; however, most involve the use of dangerous processes or solvents (e.g., xylene and liquid nitrogen) and may also compromise the sample. We have revisited this and developed a new, simple, nondestructive, and safe method that can be used in concert with the new, more sensitive technology that may be able to improve downstream analysis of slide-bound material. The removal method uses a humid environment to gradually separate the mounting media from the coverslip. The coverslip is then coated in a thin layer of clear nail polish, allowing the coverslip to be removed without cracking, providing access to the sample. The method was able to successfully remove 100% of the coverslips mounted using a variety of mounting media from slides of varying ages (6+ years).

Indexed as

Specimen HandlingForensic MedicineForensic SciencesHumansHumiditycoverslipcoverslip removalmicroscope slideslidearchival

Identifiers

PMID40369772
PMCPMC12424096

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.