ReviewGenes2026
Recreational Genetic Databases, Artificial Intelligence, and Forensic Genetics: Technical Advances, Legal Challenges, and Bioethical Perspectives.
Review in Genes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThe expansion of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing has generated civilian genomic databases containing tens of millions of profiles, some of which may be available, under specific conditions, for criminal investigations. Meanwhile, artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping forensic genetics through applications such as kinship inference, DNA mixture deconvolution, probabilistic phenotyping, and the prioritization of investigative leads. This review examines the scientific, legal, and ethical implications of the convergence between DTC genetic databases, forensic investigative genetic genealogy (FIGG), and AI-assisted forensic analysis.
methodsThis article presents a multidisciplinary narrative review at the intersection of forensic genomics, FIGG, artificial intelligence, genomic data governance, and bioethics, with particular attention to French, European, and international regulatory frameworks.
resultsSix major dimensions structure the field: (i) the current state of forensic genomic technologies, including STRs, SNPs, and next-generation sequencing; (ii) the contribution of AI to forensic genetics and FIGG; (iii) the governance of large-scale genomic data; (iv) regulatory fragmentation across jurisdictions; (v) the principal bioethical tensions raised by the forensic use of DTC genetic databases; and (vi) future governance needs and operational recommendations. Across these dimensions, three findings emerge. First, genealogical matches and AI-supported outputs should be understood primarily as investigative leads rather than autonomous judicial evidence. Second, the relational nature of genomic data exposes non-consenting relatives to potential forensic scrutiny, thereby challenging traditional models of individual consent and privacy. Third, the absence of harmonized standards for validation, transparency, and oversight remains a major obstacle to legal certainty, judicial admissibility, and public legitimacy.
conclusionsThe forensic use of DTC genetic databases should not be understood as a purely technical extension of conventional DNA profiling. It reflects a broader transformation in the relationship between genomic knowledge, criminal investigation, and fundamental rights. Its long-term legitimacy and operational viability will depend on the combined strength of scientific reliability, legal proportionality, ethical safeguards, and meaningful democratic oversight.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.