The Analysis of Australian Proficiency Test Data over a Ten-Year Period

Wilson-Wilde, Linzi; Smith, Stephen; Bruenisholz, Eva

doi:10.1080/19409044.2017.1352054

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this respect, collaborative exercises and proficiency tests among laboratories allow monitoring forensic expertise and grant valuable insight into the quality of typing and accuracy of results. Such trials predate the analysis of STR markers and are regularly organized with varying focus by diverse entities in the forensic field, such as CTS [ 54 ], EDNAP [ 55 ], ESWG-ISFG [ 46 ], GEDNAP [ 48 ], GeFi [ 28 ], GHEP-ISFG [ 56 ] and others. Typically, aliquots or identical replicates of a few samples or stains are sent to participating laboratories for analysis; results are reported back to the organizers and (blindly) evaluated, sometimes also considering raw data to investigate the origin of inconsistencies in more detail [ 57 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The stated magnitude of errors or discordance in autosomal STR results rarely exceeded 1%, with a maximum of 4%, both in mock casework trials and kinship exercises, e.g., [ 33 , 46 , 54 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 ]. Higher error rates in mixture studies including low-template components [ 74 , 75 ] were not considered.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Higher error rates in mixture studies including low-template components [ 74 , 75 ] were not considered. Regardless of the method used in testing, human clerical errors in transcription of results were persistently reported, e.g., [ 21 , 33 , 46 , 48 , 54 , 64 , 66 , 69 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 ]. While most authors did not detail the type of human error, a broad spectrum mirrored by the STRidER QC can be expected.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The STRidER Report on Two Years of Quality Control of Autosomal STR Population Datasets

Bodner

Parson

2020

Genes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

STRidER, the STRs for Identity ENFSI Reference Database, is a curated, freely publicly available online allele frequency database, quality control (QC) and software platform for autosomal Short Tandem Repeats (STRs) developed under the endorsement of the International Society for Forensic Genetics. Continuous updates comprise additional STR loci and populations in the frequency database and many further STR-related aspects. One significant innovation is the autosomal STR data QC provided prior to publication of datasets. Such scrutiny was lacking previously, leaving QC to authors, reviewers and editors, which led to an unacceptably high error rate in scientific papers. The results from scrutinizing 184 STR datasets containing >177,000 individual genotypes submitted in the first two years of STRidER QC since 2017 revealed that about two-thirds of the STR datasets were either being withdrawn by the authors after initial feedback or rejected based on a conservative error rate. Almost no error-free submissions were received, which clearly shows that centralized QC and data curation are essential to maintain the high-quality standard required in forensic genetics. While many errors had minor impact on the resulting allele frequencies, multiple error categories were commonly found within single datasets. Several datasets contained serious flaws. We discuss the factors that caused the errors to draw the attention to redundant pitfalls and thus contribute to better quality of autosomal STR datasets and allele frequency reports.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The STRidER Report on Two Years of Quality Control of Autosomal STR Population Datasets

Bodner

Parson

2020

Genes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In many disciplines, examiners have historically claimed the ability to generate perfect identifications or error rates of zero [ 19 , 20 ]. No scientific discipline actually achieves error rates of zero, and errors have been found in many disciplines in forensics [ 21 ], and even in declared proficiency tests [ 22 ]. Blind proficiency tests can flag errors or mistakes related directly to examiner performance and also with the laboratory pipeline, and are one of the only methods that can identify misconduct.…”

Section: Key Challenges and Solutions/next Stepsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing blind proficiency testing in forensic laboratories: Motivation, obstacles, and recommendations

Mejia

Cuellar

Salyards

2020

Forensic Science International: Synergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regular proficiency testing of forensic examiners is required at accredited laboratories and widely accepted as an important component of a functioning quality assurance program. Yet, unlike in other testing industries, the majority of forensic laboratories testing programs rely entirely on declared proficiency tests. Some laboratories, primarily federal forensic facilities, have adopted blind proficiency tests, which are also used in the medical and drug testing industries. Blind tests offer advantages. They must resemble actual cases, can test the entire laboratory pipeline, avoid changes in behavior from an examiner knowing they are being tested, and are one of the only methods that can detect misconduct. However, the forensic context present both logistical and cultural obstacles to the implementation of blind proficiency tests. In November 2018, we convened a meeting of directors and quality assurance managers of local and state laboratories to discuss obstacles to the adoption of blind testing and assess successful and potential strategies to overcome them. Here, we compare the situation in forensic science to other testing disciplines, identifying obstacles to the implementation of blind proficiency testing in forensic contexts, and proposing ways to address those issues and increase the ecological validity of proficiency tests at forensic laboratories.

show abstract

Communicating forensic science opinion: An examination of expert reporting practices

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Analysis of Australian Proficiency Test Data over a Ten-Year Period

Cited by 5 publications

References 9 publications

The STRidER Report on Two Years of Quality Control of Autosomal STR Population Datasets

The STRidER Report on Two Years of Quality Control of Autosomal STR Population Datasets

Implementing blind proficiency testing in forensic laboratories: Motivation, obstacles, and recommendations

Communicating forensic science opinion: An examination of expert reporting practices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About