Literature DB >> 21198611

Confidence interval of the likelihood ratio associated with mixed stain DNA evidence.

Gary W Beecham1, Bruce S Weir.   

Abstract

Likelihood ratios are necessary to properly interpret mixed stain DNA evidence. They can flexibly consider alternate hypotheses and can account for population substructure. The likelihood ratio should be seen as an estimate and not a fixed value, because the calculations are functions of allelic frequency estimates that were estimated from a small portion of the population. Current methods do not account for uncertainty in the likelihood ratio estimates and are therefore an incomplete picture of the strength of the evidence. We propose the use of a confidence interval to report the consequent variation of likelihood ratios. The confidence interval is calculated using the standard forensic likelihood ratio formulae and a variance estimate derived using the Taylor expansion. The formula is explained, and a computer program has been made available. Numeric work shows that the evidential strength of DNA profiles decreases as the variation among populations increases.
© 2010 American Academy of Forensic Sciences.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21198611      PMCID: PMC4574915          DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2010.01600.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Forensic Sci        ISSN: 0022-1198            Impact factor:   1.832


  13 in total

1.  Population data on the thirteen CODIS core short tandem repeat loci in African Americans, U.S. Caucasians, Hispanics, Bahamians, Jamaicans, and Trinidadians.

Authors:  B Budowle; T R Moretti; A L Baumstark; D A Defenbaugh; K M Keys
Journal:  J Forensic Sci       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 1.832

2.  The calculation of DNA match probabilities in mixed race populations.

Authors:  C Triggs; S A Harbison; J Buckleton
Journal:  Sci Justice       Date:  2000 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.124

3.  Assessing uncertainty in DNA evidence caused by sampling effects.

Authors:  J M Curran; J S Buckleton; C M Triggs; B S Weir
Journal:  Sci Justice       Date:  2002 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.124

4.  A comparison of adjustment methods to test the robustness of an STR DNA database comprised of 24 European populations.

Authors:  Peter Gill; Lindsey Foreman; John S Buckleton; Christopher M Triggs; Heather Allen
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2003-01-28       Impact factor: 2.395

5.  Bounding the number of contributors to mixed DNA stains.

Authors:  Steffen L Lauritzen; Julia Mortera
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2002-12-04       Impact factor: 2.395

6.  DNA mixtures in forensic casework: a 4-year retrospective study.

Authors:  Yolanda Torres; Inmaculada Flores; Victoria Prieto; Manuel López-Soto; María José Farfán; Angel Carracedo; Pilar Sanz
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2003-07-08       Impact factor: 2.395

7.  DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics: Recommendations on the interpretation of mixtures.

Authors:  P Gill; C H Brenner; J S Buckleton; A Carracedo; M Krawczak; W R Mayr; N Morling; M Prinz; P M Schneider; B S Weir
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2006-06-05       Impact factor: 2.395

Review 8.  Analysis and interpretation of mixed forensic stains using DNA STR profiling.

Authors:  T M Clayton; J P Whitaker; R Sparkes; P Gill
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  1998-01-09       Impact factor: 2.395

Review 9.  Interpreting DNA mixtures.

Authors:  B S Weir; C M Triggs; L Starling; L I Stowell; K A Walsh; J Buckleton
Journal:  J Forensic Sci       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 1.832

10.  Forensic utility of mitochondrial DNA analysis based on denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography.

Authors:  Greggory S LaBerge; Robert J Shelton; Phillip B Danielson
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 1.351

View more
  5 in total

1.  Object-oriented Bayesian networks for paternity cases with allelic dependencies.

Authors:  Amanda B Hepler; Bruce S Weir
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 4.882

2.  The factor of 10 in forensic DNA match probabilities.

Authors:  Simone Gittelson; Tamyra R Moretti; Anthony J Onorato; Bruce Budowle; Bruce S Weir; John Buckleton
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet       Date:  2017-02-16       Impact factor: 4.882

3.  The forensic value of X-linked markers in mixed-male DNA analysis.

Authors:  HaiJun He; Lagabaiyila Zha; JinHong Cai; Jian Huang
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2018-05-04       Impact factor: 2.686

4.  Familial identification: population structure and relationship distinguishability.

Authors:  Rori V Rohlfs; Stephanie Malia Fullerton; Bruce S Weir
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2012-02-09       Impact factor: 5.917

Review 5.  A Review of Probabilistic Genotyping Systems: EuroForMix, DNAStatistX and STRmix™.

Authors:  Peter Gill; Corina Benschop; John Buckleton; Øyvind Bleka; Duncan Taylor
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2021-09-30       Impact factor: 4.096

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.