(重新)定位法医研究和发展,以增加在枪弹残留检查中的影响

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, LEGAL
Céline Weyermann , Virginie Redouté Minzière , Thomas Tilborg , Kal Chana , Hervé Ménard , Bart Nys , Ruediger Schumacher , Sébastien Charles
{"title":"(重新)定位法医研究和发展,以增加在枪弹残留检查中的影响","authors":"Céline Weyermann ,&nbsp;Virginie Redouté Minzière ,&nbsp;Thomas Tilborg ,&nbsp;Kal Chana ,&nbsp;Hervé Ménard ,&nbsp;Bart Nys ,&nbsp;Ruediger Schumacher ,&nbsp;Sébastien Charles","doi":"10.1016/j.forsciint.2025.112560","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Despite its relatively high cost and time-consuming analysis, scanning electron microscopy coupled with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM-EDS) has been the “gold standard” technique for analysing inorganic gunshot residue (GSR) particles for more than 40 years. Conversely, research has largely focused on developing new techniques and innovations that have struggled to gain acceptance in routine GSR examination.This study aims to explore the persistent gap perceived between research and practice in the field of GSR, specifically why research continues to propose novel instrumental analyses that are not adopted in practice. This question was examined through a comprehensive literature review, a survey of GSR examination, and a round table organised at the annual meeting of the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) Expert Working Group (EWG) Firearms / GSR in Brussels in 2023.The literature review highlighted that publications on GSR have steadily increased over the past 20 years, followed by a slight decrease after 2020 to reach approximately 40 publications in 2022. In that year, 42 % of the relevant publications focused on the development of novel methods, while 26 % addressed issues related to GSR persistence, prevalence, and interpretation.Survey responses from 45 GSR experts confirmed that residues are mainly collected from hands with carbon stubs and analysed by SEM-EDS. Among respondents, 90 % work in accredited laboratories, and 95 % have little time for research beyond routine duties. While practical innovations have largely concentrated on the optimisation of current approaches, experts strongly support collecting additional forensic data on persistence, prevalence, and secondary transfer. However, such data often suffer from a lack of harmonisation and are only indirectly useful for the interpretation, which is gradually shifting from source to activity inferences.Both practitioners and academics advocate for increased collaboration to define and conduct more impactful GSR research. However, addressing the identified barriers may require systemic changes that go beyond simply increasing resources.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12341,"journal":{"name":"Forensic science international","volume":"375 ","pages":"Article 112560"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"(Re-)positionning forensic research & development for increased impact in gunshot residue examination\",\"authors\":\"Céline Weyermann ,&nbsp;Virginie Redouté Minzière ,&nbsp;Thomas Tilborg ,&nbsp;Kal Chana ,&nbsp;Hervé Ménard ,&nbsp;Bart Nys ,&nbsp;Ruediger Schumacher ,&nbsp;Sébastien Charles\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.forsciint.2025.112560\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Despite its relatively high cost and time-consuming analysis, scanning electron microscopy coupled with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM-EDS) has been the “gold standard” technique for analysing inorganic gunshot residue (GSR) particles for more than 40 years. Conversely, research has largely focused on developing new techniques and innovations that have struggled to gain acceptance in routine GSR examination.This study aims to explore the persistent gap perceived between research and practice in the field of GSR, specifically why research continues to propose novel instrumental analyses that are not adopted in practice. This question was examined through a comprehensive literature review, a survey of GSR examination, and a round table organised at the annual meeting of the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) Expert Working Group (EWG) Firearms / GSR in Brussels in 2023.The literature review highlighted that publications on GSR have steadily increased over the past 20 years, followed by a slight decrease after 2020 to reach approximately 40 publications in 2022. In that year, 42 % of the relevant publications focused on the development of novel methods, while 26 % addressed issues related to GSR persistence, prevalence, and interpretation.Survey responses from 45 GSR experts confirmed that residues are mainly collected from hands with carbon stubs and analysed by SEM-EDS. Among respondents, 90 % work in accredited laboratories, and 95 % have little time for research beyond routine duties. While practical innovations have largely concentrated on the optimisation of current approaches, experts strongly support collecting additional forensic data on persistence, prevalence, and secondary transfer. However, such data often suffer from a lack of harmonisation and are only indirectly useful for the interpretation, which is gradually shifting from source to activity inferences.Both practitioners and academics advocate for increased collaboration to define and conduct more impactful GSR research. However, addressing the identified barriers may require systemic changes that go beyond simply increasing resources.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12341,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forensic science international\",\"volume\":\"375 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112560\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forensic science international\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0379073825001987\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic science international","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0379073825001987","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

扫描电子显微镜与能量色散x射线能谱(SEM-EDS)相结合,尽管其分析成本相对较高且耗时较长,但40多年来一直是分析无机射击残留物(GSR)颗粒的“金标准”技术。相反,研究主要集中在开发新技术和创新上,这些技术和创新很难在常规GSR检查中获得认可。本研究旨在探讨GSR领域的研究与实践之间持续存在的差距,特别是为什么研究不断提出新的工具分析,而这些工具分析在实践中没有被采用。通过全面的文献综述,对GSR检查的调查,以及2023年在布鲁塞尔举行的欧洲法医科学研究所网络(ENFSI)专家工作组(EWG)火器/ GSR年度会议上组织的圆桌会议,对这个问题进行了研究。文献综述强调,在过去20年中,关于GSR的出版物稳步增加,随后在2020年后略有减少,到2022年约为40篇。在那一年,42% %的相关出版物关注于新方法的发展,而26% %的出版物关注与GSR持久性、普遍性和解释相关的问题。来自45位GSR专家的调查回复证实,残留物主要是从带有碳根的手上收集的,并通过SEM-EDS进行了分析。在受访者中,90% %在认可的实验室工作,95% %在日常工作之外几乎没有时间进行研究。虽然实际的创新主要集中在优化现有方法上,但专家们强烈支持收集关于持久性、患病率和二次转移的额外法医数据。然而,这些数据往往缺乏协调,对解释只有间接的用处,而解释正逐渐从来源转向活动推断。从业者和学者都主张加强合作,以定义和开展更有影响力的GSR研究。然而,解决已确定的障碍可能需要系统性的变革,而不仅仅是增加资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
(Re-)positionning forensic research & development for increased impact in gunshot residue examination
Despite its relatively high cost and time-consuming analysis, scanning electron microscopy coupled with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM-EDS) has been the “gold standard” technique for analysing inorganic gunshot residue (GSR) particles for more than 40 years. Conversely, research has largely focused on developing new techniques and innovations that have struggled to gain acceptance in routine GSR examination.This study aims to explore the persistent gap perceived between research and practice in the field of GSR, specifically why research continues to propose novel instrumental analyses that are not adopted in practice. This question was examined through a comprehensive literature review, a survey of GSR examination, and a round table organised at the annual meeting of the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) Expert Working Group (EWG) Firearms / GSR in Brussels in 2023.The literature review highlighted that publications on GSR have steadily increased over the past 20 years, followed by a slight decrease after 2020 to reach approximately 40 publications in 2022. In that year, 42 % of the relevant publications focused on the development of novel methods, while 26 % addressed issues related to GSR persistence, prevalence, and interpretation.Survey responses from 45 GSR experts confirmed that residues are mainly collected from hands with carbon stubs and analysed by SEM-EDS. Among respondents, 90 % work in accredited laboratories, and 95 % have little time for research beyond routine duties. While practical innovations have largely concentrated on the optimisation of current approaches, experts strongly support collecting additional forensic data on persistence, prevalence, and secondary transfer. However, such data often suffer from a lack of harmonisation and are only indirectly useful for the interpretation, which is gradually shifting from source to activity inferences.Both practitioners and academics advocate for increased collaboration to define and conduct more impactful GSR research. However, addressing the identified barriers may require systemic changes that go beyond simply increasing resources.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Forensic science international
Forensic science international 医学-医学:法
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
9.10%
发文量
285
审稿时长
49 days
期刊介绍: Forensic Science International is the flagship journal in the prestigious Forensic Science International family, publishing the most innovative, cutting-edge, and influential contributions across the forensic sciences. Fields include: forensic pathology and histochemistry, chemistry, biochemistry and toxicology, biology, serology, odontology, psychiatry, anthropology, digital forensics, the physical sciences, firearms, and document examination, as well as investigations of value to public health in its broadest sense, and the important marginal area where science and medicine interact with the law. The journal publishes: Case Reports Commentaries Letters to the Editor Original Research Papers (Regular Papers) Rapid Communications Review Articles Technical Notes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信