The crux of time: A meta-analysis of ex vivo whole blood degradation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Estimating the time since deposition (TSD) of a bloodstain can provide important medico-legal information for crime scene investigation. Research in this area primarily investigates the degradation of either hemoglobin or genetic material over time. In this work, we present a comprehensive meta-analysis on bloodstain TSD research. Our results are interpreted from 25 quantitative studies used to probe the effect of biomolecule studied, analytical technique used, substrate porosity, environmental conditions, and blood source on TSD estimates. There was an overall strong effect of time across studies (Fisher’s Zr = 1.66, r = 0.93), and generally, we found that the type of biomolecule studied (e.g., hemoglobin, DNA) had equal effect sizes for TSD estimation. Differences in the mean TSD effect size were also observed between substrate porosity. Interestingly, the blood source does not significantly influence the magnitude of the effect sizes in TSD estimation. Despite the clear effect of time, forensically relevant prediction of bloodstain TSD remains complicated by inter-donor variability, type of substrate and environmental conditions. We recommend that future bloodstain TSD research increase sample size, include summary statistics and standardize experimental methodologies so that we can develop a quantitative understanding of the physicochemical processes involved in whole blood degradation in ex vivo conditions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".