122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38000160)
1. Determining the number and size of background samples derived from an area adjacent to the target sample that provide the greatest support for a POI in a target sample.
Reither JB; Taylor D; Szkuta B; van Oorschot RAH
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2024 Jan; 68():102977. PubMed ID: 38000160
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Exploring how the LR of a POI in a target sample is impacted by awareness of the profile of the background derived from an area adjacent to the target sample.
Reither JB; Taylor D; Szkuta B; van Oorschot RAH
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2023 Jul; 65():102868. PubMed ID: 37001465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. Internal validation of STRmix™ for the interpretation of single source and mixed DNA profiles.
Moretti TR; Just RS; Kehl SC; Willis LE; Buckleton JS; Bright JA; Taylor DA; Onorato AJ
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2017 Jul; 29():126-144. PubMed ID: 28504203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. A comparison of likelihood ratios obtained from EuroForMix and STRmix™.
Cheng K; Bleka Ø; Gill P; Curran J; Bright JA; Taylor D; Buckleton J
J Forensic Sci; 2021 Nov; 66(6):2138-2155. PubMed ID: 34553371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Evidentiary evaluation of single cells renders highly informative forensic comparisons across multifarious admixtures.
Duffy KR; Lun DS; Mulcahy MM; O'Donnell L; Sheth N; Grgicak CM
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2023 May; 64():102852. PubMed ID: 36934551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. STRmix™ collaborative exercise on DNA mixture interpretation.
Bright JA; Cheng K; Kerr Z; McGovern C; Kelly H; Moretti TR; Smith MA; Bieber FR; Budowle B; Coble MD; Alghafri R; Allen PS; Barber A; Beamer V; Buettner C; Russell M; Gehrig C; Hicks T; Charak J; Cheong-Wing K; Ciecko A; Davis CT; Donley M; Pedersen N; Gartside B; Granger D; Greer-Ritzheimer M; Reisinger E; Kennedy J; Grammer E; Kaplan M; Hansen D; Larsen HJ; Laureano A; Li C; Lien E; Lindberg E; Kelly C; Mallinder B; Malsom S; Yacovone-Margetts A; McWhorter A; Prajapati SM; Powell T; Shutler G; Stevenson K; Stonehouse AR; Smith L; Murakami J; Halsing E; Wright D; Clark L; Taylor DA; Buckleton J
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 May; 40():1-8. PubMed ID: 30665115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Investigation into the effect of mixtures comprising related people on non-donor likelihood ratios, and potential practises to mitigate providing misleading opinions.
Kalafut T; Bright JA; Taylor D; Buckleton J
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2022 Jul; 59():102691. PubMed ID: 35390645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Performance of a method for weighting a range in the number of contributors in probabilistic genotyping.
McGovern C; Cheng K; Kelly H; Ciecko A; Taylor D; Buckleton JS; Bright JA
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Sep; 48():102352. PubMed ID: 32707473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. CEESIt: A computational tool for the interpretation of STR mixtures.
Swaminathan H; Garg A; Grgicak CM; Medard M; Lun DS
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 May; 22():149-160. PubMed ID: 26946255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Validation of a DNA mixture statistics tool incorporating allelic drop-out and drop-in.
Mitchell AA; Tamariz J; O'Connell K; Ducasse N; Budimlija Z; Prinz M; Caragine T
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2012 Dec; 6(6):749-61. PubMed ID: 22999739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Combining evidence across multiple mixed DNA profiles for improved resolution of a donor when a common contributor can be assumed.
Taylor D; Kruijver M
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Nov; 49():102375. PubMed ID: 32937256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Using big data from probabilistic genotyping to solve crime.
Taylor D; Abarno D
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2022 Mar; 57():102631. PubMed ID: 34861631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
