Commentary on: Thompson WC. Uncertainty in probabilistic genotyping of low template DNA: a case study comparing STRmix™ and TrueAllele™. J Forensic Sci. 2023;68 (3):1049-63. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.15225.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: Blackwell Pub Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 0375370 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1556-4029 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 00221198 NLM ISO Abbreviation: J Forensic Sci Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Publication: 2006- : Malden, MA : Blackwell Pub.
      Original Publication: [Chicago, Ill.] : Callaghan and Co., 1956-
    • Subject Terms:
      DNA Fingerprinting* ; DNA*; Genotype ; Uncertainty ; Likelihood Functions ; Microsatellite Repeats
    • References:
      Thompson WC. Uncertainty in probabilistic genotyping of low template DNA: a case study comparing STRmix™ and TrueAllele™. J Forensic Sci. 2023;68(3):1049-1063. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.15225.
      Riman S, Iyer H, Vallone PM. Examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the PROVEDIt dataset. PloS One. 2021;16(9):e0256714. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256714.
      Buckleton J, Bright J-A, Taylor D, Wivell R, Bleka Ø, Gill P, et al. Re: Riman et al. Examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the PROVEDIt dataset. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2022;59:102709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2022.102709.
      Ramos D, Meuwly D, Haraksim R, Berger CEH. Validation of forensic automatic likelihood ratio methods. In: Banks D, Kafadar K, Kaye D, Tackett M, editors. Handbook of forensic statistics. Boca Raton, Fl: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2020.
      Buckleton JS, Kruijver M, Curran J, Bright J-A. Calibration of STRmix LRs following the method of Hannig et al. Institute of Environmental Science and Research. 2020 https://research.esr.cri.nz/articles/report/Calibration_of_STRmix_LRs_following_the_method_of_Hannig_et_al_/12324011. Accessed 05 Oct 2023.
      Bright J-A, Jones Dukes M, Pugh SN, Evett IW, Buckleton JS. Applying calibration to LRs produced by a DNA interpretation software. Aus J Forensic Sci. 2021;53(2):147-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/00450618.2019.1682668.
      Russell L, Cooper S, Wivell R, Kerr Z, Taylor D, Buckleton J, et al. A guide to results and diagnostics within a STRmix™ report. WIREs Forensic Sci. 2019;1(6):e1354. https://doi.org/10.1002/wfs2.1354.
      Bright J-A, Richards R, Kruijver M, Kelly H, McGovern C, Magee A, et al. Internal validation of STRmix™ - a multi laboratory response to PCAST. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2018;34:11-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.01.003.
      Biedermann A, Taroni F, Thompson WC. Using graphical probability analysis (Bayes nets) to evaluate a conditional DNA inclusion. Law Probab Risk. 2011;10(2):89-121. https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgr007.
      Slooten K, Caliebe A. Contributors are a nuisance (parameter) for DNA mixture evidence evaluation. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2018;37:116-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.05.004.
      McGovern C, Bright J-A, Buckleton J, Taylor D. Examination of a novel method to allow for a range in the number of contributors to a DNA profile: a key area of subjectivity in DNA evidence interpretation. Proceedings of the 26th international symposium of human identification. Grapevine, TX. Madison, WI: Promega Corporation; 2015 https://scv10mr-cdnpre-p-cus-00.azureedge.net/-/media/files/products-and-services/genetic-identity/ishi-26-oral-abstracts/14-mcgovern.pdf?rev=767064bfd91b4b70b755bfbcae5f1a3f&_gl=1*1mdvymo*_ga*NjA2NTY2OS4xNjkxMzQ0Mzkx*_ga_3KTGR4JGE1*MTY5MTM0NDM5MC4xLjAuMTY5MTM0NDM5Mi42MC4wLjA. Accessed 05 Oct 2023.
      Taylor D, Bright J-A, Buckleton J. Interpreting forensic DNA profiling evidence without specifying the number of contributors. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2014;13:269-280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.08.014.
      Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods. Recommendations of the SWGDAM Ad Hoc Working Group on genotyping results reported as likelihood ratios. 2018 https://www.swgdam.org/_files/ugd/4344b0_dd5221694d1448588dcd0937738c9e46.pdf. Accessed 05 Oct 2023.
      Taroni F, Bozza S, Biedermann A, Aitken C. Dismissal of the illusion of uncertainty in the assessment of a likelihood ratio. Law Probab Risk. 2015;15(1):1-16. https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgv008.
      Meester R, Slooten K. Probability and forensic evidence: theory, philosophy, and applications. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press; 2021. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108596176.
      Berger CEH, Slooten K. The LR does not exist. Sci Justice. 2016;56(5):388-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2016.06.005.
      Thompson W. Painting the target around the matching profile: the Texas sharpshooter fallacy in forensic DNA interpretation. Law Probab Risk. 2009;8:257-276. https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgp013.
    • Grant Information:
      NIJ 2020-DQ-BX-0022 National Institute of Justice
    • Accession Number:
      9007-49-2 (DNA)
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20231025 Date Completed: 20240104 Latest Revision: 20240104
    • Publication Date:
      20240104
    • Accession Number:
      10.1111/1556-4029.15405
    • Accession Number:
      37877323