227 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31580496)
21. Accurate assessment of the weight of evidence for DNA mixtures by integrating the likelihood ratio.
Slooten K
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2017 Mar; 27():1-16. PubMed ID: 27914277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Quantification of forensic genetic evidence: Comparison of results obtained by qualitative and quantitative software for real casework samples.
Costa C; Figueiredo C; Amorim A; Costa S; Ferreira PM; Pinto N
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2022 Jul; 59():102715. PubMed ID: 35490558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Internal Validation of MaSTR™ Probabilistic Genotyping Software for the Interpretation of 2-5 Person Mixed DNA Profiles.
Adamowicz MS; Rambo TN; Clarke JL
Genes (Basel); 2022 Aug; 13(8):. PubMed ID: 36011340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Interpreting a major component from a mixed DNA profile with an unknown number of minor contributors.
Bille T; Weitz S; Buckleton JS; Bright JA
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 May; 40():150-159. PubMed ID: 30844683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Facilitating complex DNA mixture interpretation by sequencing highly polymorphic haplotypes.
Voskoboinik L; Motro U; Darvasi A
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Jul; 35():136-140. PubMed ID: 29775859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Carrying out common DNA donor analysis using DBLR™ on two or five-cell mini-mixture subsamples for improved discrimination power in complex DNA mixtures.
Huffman K; Kruijver M; Ballantyne J; Taylor D
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2023 Sep; 66():102908. PubMed ID: 37402330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Internal validation of STRmix™ - A multi laboratory response to PCAST.
Bright JA; Richards R; Kruijver M; Kelly H; McGovern C; Magee A; McWhorter A; Ciecko A; Peck B; Baumgartner C; Buettner C; McWilliams S; McKenna C; Gallacher C; Mallinder B; Wright D; Johnson D; Catella D; Lien E; O'Connor C; Duncan G; Bundy J; Echard J; Lowe J; Stewart J; Corrado K; Gentile S; Kaplan M; Hassler M; McDonald N; Hulme P; Oefelein RH; Montpetit S; Strong M; Noël S; Malsom S; Myers S; Welti S; Moretti T; McMahon T; Grill T; Kalafut T; Greer-Ritzheimer M; Beamer V; Taylor DA; Buckleton JS
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 May; 34():11-24. PubMed ID: 29367014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Probabilistic genotyping of single cell replicates from complex DNA mixtures recovers higher contributor LRs than standard analysis.
Huffman K; Hanson E; Ballantyne J
Sci Justice; 2022 Mar; 62(2):156-163. PubMed ID: 35277229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. The efficacy of DNA mixture to mixture matching.
Bright JA; Taylor D; Kerr Z; Buckleton J; Kruijver M
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 Jul; 41():64-71. PubMed ID: 30986620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. DNA mixtures interpretation - A proof-of-concept multi-software comparison highlighting different probabilistic methods' performances on challenging samples.
Alladio E; Omedei M; Cisana S; D'Amico G; Caneparo D; Vincenti M; Garofano P
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Nov; 37():143-150. PubMed ID: 30173123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. An inter-laboratory comparison of probabilistic genotyping parameters and evaluation of performance on DNA mixtures from different laboratories.
Boodoosingh S; Kelly H; Curran JM; Kalafut T
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2024 Jul; 71():103046. PubMed ID: 38598920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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.
Perlin MW; Butt N; Wilson MR
J Forensic Sci; 2024 Jul; 69(4):1516-1518. PubMed ID: 38664900
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. A novel computational strategy to predict the value of the evidence in the SNP-based forensic mixtures.
Pascali VL
PLoS One; 2021; 16(10):e0247344. PubMed ID: 34653182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Application of random match probability calculations to mixed STR profiles.
Bille T; Bright JA; Buckleton J
J Forensic Sci; 2013 Mar; 58(2):474-85. PubMed ID: 23425220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The interpretation of mixed DNA profiles from a mother, father, and child trio.
Lin MH; Bright JA; Pugh SN; Buckleton JS
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Jan; 44():102175. PubMed ID: 31644964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Using the Nondonor Distribution to Improve Communication and Inform Decision Making for Low LRs from Minor Contributors in Mixed DNA Profiles.
Schuerman C; Kalafut T; Buchanan C; Sutton J; Bright JA
J Forensic Sci; 2020 Jul; 65(4):1072-1084. PubMed ID: 32134501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. An Investigation into Compound Likelihood Ratios for Forensic DNA Mixtures.
Wivell R; Kelly H; Kokoszka J; Daniels J; Dickson L; Buckleton J; Bright JA
Genes (Basel); 2023 Mar; 14(3):. PubMed ID: 36980986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. An assessment of the performance of the probabilistic genotyping software EuroForMix: Trends in likelihood ratios and analysis of Type I & II errors.
Benschop CCG; Nijveld A; Duijs FE; Sijen T
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 Sep; 42():31-38. PubMed ID: 31212207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Exploring likelihood ratios assigned for siblings of the true mixture contributor as an alternate contributor.
Kelly H; Coble M; Kruijver M; Wivell R; Bright JA
J Forensic Sci; 2022 May; 67(3):1167-1175. PubMed ID: 35211970
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. NIST interlaboratory studies involving DNA mixtures (MIX13): A modern analysis.
Buckleton JS; Bright JA; Cheng K; Budowle B; Coble MD
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Nov; 37():172-179. PubMed ID: 30176439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
