ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2026
Genetic analysis of chromosome 2 copy-neutral loss of heterozygosity in paternity testing.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hair vs. fabric: substrate-dependent microbiome shifts dictate the accuracy of forensic body-fluid identification.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Application of artificial intelligence in the determination of the postmortem interval: Systematic review of the literature and metaanalysis.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2026Review
- PMI estimation with cross-species transfer learning and visual information generated by pathomics foundation model.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
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
This study investigates the cause of a non-Mendelian inheritance pattern observed at short tandem repeat (STR) loci on chromosome 2 in a paternity test and aims to provide a definitive identification opinion. STR genotyping was performed using the AGCU Expressmarker 22, Goldeneye DNA Identification System 22NC, and AGCU X Plus STR kits. Additionally, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) was used to assess copy number variations and regions of homozygosity (ROH). The cumulative paternity index based on 21 autosomal STR loci (AGCU Expressmarker 22) was 8.4361E-04. When combined with the 39 STR loci from the Goldeneye System, the index increased to 3.1806E + 04. All discordant loci-D2S441 and D2S1338-were located on chromosome 2, where the alleged father had genotypes 11,11.3 and 17,19, respectively, while the child had 14,14 and 24,24. The TPOX locus (also on chromosome 2) showed homozygosity (8,8) in the child. X-STR analysis confirmed that the alleged father contributed all necessary alleles. CMA revealed a 243.03 Mb ROH spanning 2p25-q37.3 in the child, suggesting identity by descent or uniparental disomy. These findings highlight the potential for chromosomal anomalies to mimic false exclusions in paternity testing. Comprehensive genetic analysis is recommended when inconsistencies arise at multiple loci on the same chromosome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41160122What 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.