↓ Skip to main content

Results of an inter and intra laboratory exercise on the assessment of complex autosomal DNA profiles

Overview of attention for article published in Science & Justice, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Results of an inter and intra laboratory exercise on the assessment of complex autosomal DNA profiles
Published in
Science & Justice, October 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.scijus.2016.10.001
Pubmed ID
Authors

Corina C.G. Benschop, Edward Connolly, Ricky Ansell, Bas Kokshoorn

Abstract

The interpretation of complex DNA profiles may differ between laboratories and reporting officers, which can lead to discrepancies in the final reports. In this study, we assessed the intra and inter laboratory variation in DNA mixture interpretation for three European ISO17025-accredited laboratories. To this aim, 26 reporting officers analyzed five sets of DNA profiles. Three main aspects were considered: 1) whether the mixed DNA profiles met the criteria for comparison to a reference profile, 2) the actual result of the comparison between references and DNA profiling data and 3) whether the weight of the DNA evidence could be assessed. Similarity in answers depended mostly on the complexity of the tasks. This study showed less variation within laboratories than between laboratories which could be the result of differences between internal laboratory guidelines and methods and tools available. Results show the profile types for which the three laboratories report differently, which informs indirectly on the complexity threshold the laboratories employ. Largest differences between laboratories were caused by the methods available to assess the weight of the DNA evidence. This exercise aids in training forensic scientists, refining laboratory guidelines and explaining differences between laboratories in court. Undertaking more collaborative exercises in future may stimulate dialog and consensus regarding interpretation. For training purposes, DNA profiles of the mixed stains and questioned references are made available.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 32 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 21%
Other 6 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 10 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 11 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 October 2016.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Science & Justice
#684
of 842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#286,909
of 327,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science & Justice
#11
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,196 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.