ReviewCureus2026
DNA Analysis in Forensic Odontology: Applications, Challenges, and Comparative Effectiveness With Morphological Identification.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Teeth as a Post-Mortem DNA Source for Forensic Parentage Verification in Dogs: A Case Report.Veterinary sciences · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Forensic odontology has traditionally relied on the morphological comparison of dental structures for human identification because of the durability and uniqueness of teeth. However, the emergence of DNA-based techniques has significantly enhanced the scope and reliability of forensic investigations, particularly in situations involving decomposed, burned, or fragmented remains, where conventional methods are limited. This scoping review aims to evaluate the applications of DNA analysis in forensic odontology, compare its effectiveness with that of morphological methods, and highlight current challenges and future directions. A structured review of literature published between 2000 and 2025 was conducted across major scientific databases, focusing on studies involving DNA extraction from dental tissues, profiling techniques, and comparative identification outcomes. Evidence indicates that dental pulp and dentin serve as reliable sources of DNA, with high success rates, even under adverse conditions. Short tandem repeat profiling remains the gold standard for individual identification, whereas mitochondrial DNA and next-generation sequencing expand applicability in degraded samples. Morphological methods continue to offer advantages in terms of speed, cost, and minimal infrastructure requirements, particularly when ante-mortem dental records are available. In contrast, DNA analysis demonstrates superior performance in challenging forensic scenarios such as mass disasters and advanced decomposition. Despite its advantages, DNA analysis has limitations, including degradation, contamination risk, high cost, and the need for specialized laboratory facilities. The ethical and legal considerations related to the use of genetic data remain significant. Overall, an integrated approach that combines morphological and molecular methods is the most effective strategy for human identification. Advances in rapid DNA technologies, sequencing methods, and standardization protocols are expected to further strengthen the role of forensic odontology in modern medical practice.
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.