Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Forensic Sci Int Genet ; 9: 47-54, 2014 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24528579

ABSTRACT

There has been very little work published on the variation of reporting practices of mixtures between laboratories, but it has been previously demonstrated that there is little consistency. This is because there is no current uniformity of practice, so different laboratories will operate using different rules. The interpretation of mixtures is not solely a matter of using some software to provide 'an answer'. An assessment of a case will usually begin with a consideration of the circumstances of a crime. Assumptions made about the numbers of contributors follow from an examination of the electropherogram(s)--and these may differ between the prosecution and the defence hypotheses. There may be a necessity to evaluate several sets of hypotheses for any given case if the circumstances are uncertain. Once the hypotheses are formulated, the mathematical analysis is complex and can only be accomplished by the use of specialist software. In order to obtain meaningful results, it is essential that scientists are trained, not only in the use of the software, but also in the methodology to understand the likelihood ratio concept that is used. The Euroforgen-NoE initiative has developed a training course that utilizes the LRmix program to carry out the calculations. This software encompasses the recommendations of the ISFG DNA commissions on mixture interpretation and is able to interpret samples that may come from two or more contributors and may also be partial profiles. Recently, eighteen different laboratories were trained in the methodology. Afterwards they were asked to independently analyze two different cases with partial mixture DNA evidence and to write a statement court-report. We show that by introducing a structured training programme, it is possible to demonstrate, for the first time, that a high degree of standardization, leading to uniformity of results can be achieved by participating laboratories.


Subject(s)
DNA Fingerprinting/standards , Laboratories/standards , Likelihood Functions , Software , Europe , Humans , Statistics as Topic/education
2.
Forensic Sci Int Genet ; 7(1): 10-5, 2013 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22613778

ABSTRACT

The GHEP-ISFG Working Group performed a collaborative exercise to monitor the current practice of mitochondrial (mt)DNA reporting. The participating laboratories were invited to evaluate a hypothetical case example and assess the statistical significance of a match between the haplotypes of a case (hair) sample and a suspect. A total of 31 forensic laboratories participated of which all but one used the EMPOP database. Nevertheless, we observed a tenfold range of reported LR values (32-333.4), which was mainly due to the selection of different reference datasets in EMPOP but also due to different applied formulae. The results suggest the need for more standardization as well as additional research to harmonize the reporting of mtDNA evidence.


Subject(s)
DNA, Mitochondrial/genetics , Databases, Genetic , Haplotypes , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...