Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40779965›Full record

ArticleForensic science international. Genetics2026

Revisiting guidance on population sampling for highly polymorphic STR loci.

Sanne E Aalbers, Katherine B Gettings

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Forensic science international. Genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sanne E AalbersDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20740, USA; US National Institute of Standards and Technology, Biomolecular Measurement Division, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, USA. Electronic address: saalbers@umd.edu.
Katherine B GettingsUS National Institute of Standards and Technology, Biomolecular Measurement Division, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, USA.

Funding

Intramural NIST DOC 9999-NIST
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Population databases allow us to attach probabilities to DNA evidence by the estimation of genotype frequencies, which rely on accurate allele frequency estimates. As short tandem repeat (STR) marker sets for human identification have expanded to include more discriminating markers, and especially now that sequencing techniques allow us to distinguish between alleles based on variation in underlying base-pair structure, it is important to reevaluate existing guidance on population database sizes for the estimation of allele frequencies. In this paper, we revisit the topic of population sampling by focusing on the representation of alleles, i.e. whether alleles are observed or not, in a sample of individuals containing data for highly polymorphic autosomal STR loci. The effect of both length- and sequence-based STR data on population sample size implications are demonstrated, and differences between lesser and more polymorphic markers are discussed. The consequences of using a limited number of individuals are explored and the impact of increasing population sample sizes by combining different data sets is shown to help determine the point at which further sampling may no longer provide significant value. Finally, different approaches for accommodating previously unobserved alleles and their impact on DNA evidence evaluations are discussed.

Indexed as

Genetics, PopulationMicrosatellite RepeatsPolymorphism, GeneticAllelesDNA FingerprintingGene FrequencyHumansAllele frequency estimationForensic sequence dataPopulation sample sizePopulation studies

Identifiers

PMID40779965
PMCPMC12382342

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.