Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42620608›Full record

ReviewForensic science international. Synergy2026

Protocols and challenges in managing multi-source biological evidence at the crime scene: a scoping review.

Mayur Sudhir Balbudhe, B Suresh Kumar Shetty, Saroj Babar, Akshita Sinha, Sahil Gupta

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Mayur Sudhir BalbudheDepartment of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, Kasturba Medical College Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
B Suresh Kumar ShettyDepartment of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, Kasturba Medical College Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Saroj BabarSchool of Forensic Science, National Forensic Sciences University, Dharwad Campus, India.
Akshita SinhaDepartment of Forensic Science, Adamas University, Kolkata, India.
Sahil GuptaStudy Mission High School, Kolkata, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To maximise DNA yield from evidence and ensure the integrity of the chain of custody, all biological evidence must be properly managed and preserved during initial crime scene processing. This scoping review aimed to collate documented protocols and issues associated with processing blood, semen, saliva, and touch DNA at the crime scene to optimise downstream DNA processing. A synthesis review of 57 peer-reviewed studies (2015-2025) was conducted using a curated table of forensic DNA evidence. Data were presented in a table organised by study features, protocols, problems, solutions, results, and suggestions. Findings from the studies referenced favour optimised double-swab (wet + dry) or adhesive tape-lifting techniques with buffered solutions (e.g., PBS, SDS) and visualisation aids (e.g., Diamond Nucleic Acid Dye); immediate air-drying or active-drying systems; chemical preservatives (Longmire's buffer, ethanol, solid NaCl); cold storage; and carrier additives. Strict anti-contamination procedures (PPE, elimination databases, negative controls) are essential, as are separate tamper-evident packaging. These protocols improve DNA recovery, reduce degradation and stochastic effects, and enhance success in STR and mtDNA profiling. Key challenges include low-template stochasticity, shedder variability, substrate interference, environmental degradation (especially aquatic and thermal), operator variability, and secondary transfer. Most studies have been conducted in laboratories, which may not be generalisable to real-world settings. Rapid, substrate-tailored collection with minimal handling, immediate preservation, and a strict chain of custody constitute the current best practice for evidence collection at the crime scene. Future studies should focus on multi-site field validations, automation, and harmonised guidelines to address current translational gaps and enhance equity in forensic contexts.

Indexed as

Biological fluidsChain of custodyContamination controlCrime scene processingDNA degradationEvidence preservationForensic DNAForensic protocolsTouch DNATrace DNATrace evidence

Identifiers

PMID42620608
PMCPMC13485658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.