Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42326391›Full record

ReviewForensic science international. Synergy2026

Interpol review of detection of AI-generated image and video deepfakes, 2022-2025.

Stijn van Lierop, Ivona Najdenkoska, Marcel Worring, Zeno Geradts

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Forensic science international. Synergy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Interpol review of forensic image and video analysis, 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026
    Review
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

4 authors.

Stijn van LieropNetherlands Forensic Institute, Laan van Ypenburg 6, The Hague, 2497GB, the Netherlands.
Ivona NajdenkoskaNetherlands Forensic Institute, Laan van Ypenburg 6, The Hague, 2497GB, the Netherlands.
Marcel WorringUniversity of Amsterdam, Science Park 900, Amsterdam, 1098XH, the Netherlands.
Zeno GeradtsNetherlands Forensic Institute, Laan van Ypenburg 6, The Hague, 2497GB, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, there has been tremendous progress in the generation of deepfakes and synthetic media. In this systematic review, we will, from a forensic perspective, discuss the latest developments in AI generation of deepfake images and videos and methods for detecting them. We analyzed more than 400 studies published between 2022 and 2025, specifically addressing the generation and detection of AI-generated deepfakes as opposed to manipulation of existing media. We provide an overview of the developments in various generative architectures such as GANs, diffusion models, and autoregressive models, highlighting progress in visual fidelity, user control, content consistency, and computational efficiency. In addition, we outline the most common designs of detection methods, looking at various types of features that are used for detection. We conclude that innovations are mainly centered on addressing the challenges of generalizability to unseen generators and robustness against common perturbations and adversarial attacks. However, the inconsistent use of the evaluation datasets makes it difficult to compare the methods. Our review has identified several directions for future research, such as making methods more directly applicable to forensic practice by incorporating forensically relevant benchmark datasets, paying more attention to explainability, and embedding detection methods in an evidence evaluation framework.

Indexed as

Authenticity of digital evidenceDeepfake detectionForensic scienceGenerative AIImage analysisSynthetic mediaVideo analysis

Identifiers

PMID42326391
PMCPMC13279904

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.