ArticleJournal of forensic sciences2026
A feasibility study of chromatographic methods with mass spectrometry, flame ionization detector (FID), and micro electron capture detector (μECD) for laboratory adoption of organic gunshot residue analysis at trace levels.
Article in Journal of forensic sciences, 2026. 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
Abstract
This study compares the feasibility of several chromatographic systems, including GC-MS/FID/μECD, GC-MS/MS, and LC-MS/MS for the forensic analysis of trace levels of organic gunshot residue (OGSR). Implementing new methods in forensic laboratories is a complex process fraught with challenges, but it is crucial for keeping pace with technological progress and enhancing the scientific reliability of the evidence. A major obstacle is the significant financial investment required for new equipment, validation, and personnel training. The techniques evaluated here are commonly available in fire debris, explosives, controlled substances, or toxicology units, making the transition to new OGSR services more manageable. This article provides practitioners and laboratory managers with practical recommendations for utilizing popular chromatographic methods for detecting OGSR at trace levels recovered from skin matrices. Figures of merit are reported for six different instrumental configurations for seven analytes of interest: nitroglycerin, 2,4-dinitrotoluene, diphenylamine, ethyl centralite, 2-nitrodiphenylamine, Akardite II, and 4-nitrodiphenylamine. The limits of detection range from 0.3 to 130 ppb, depending on the analyte and method used. Performance rates were calculated for datasets of 20 non-shooters and 20 shooter samples using various ammunition brands. GC-MS/μECD exhibited superior performance rates, with an average accuracy of 94%, comparable to that of LC-MS/MS. Final reconstitution with hexane improved results when using GC-MS compared with methanol. GC-MS/MS performance rates were slightly lower, with an average accuracy of 87%. These results suggest that adding a secondary detector (μECD) to a GC-MS would allow for a more accessible and sensitive approach to OGSR 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.