2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsisyn.2020.01.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interpol review of fibres and textiles 2016–2019

Abstract: This review paper covers the forensic-relevant literature in fibres and textiles from 2016 to 2019 as a part of the 19th Interpol International Forensic Science Managers Symposium. The review papers are also available at the Interpol website at: https://www.interpol.int/content/download/14458/file/Interpol%20Review%20Papers%202019.pdf .

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The INTERPOL reviews are undertaken by multiple authors who, after extensively surveying the literature, summarize all the information in individual reviews covering specific evidence types, which are combined into one final report. The most recent edition from 2019 covered 15 major topic areas reviewed by 43 authors ranging between 1 and 11 authors per area or per evidence type (Almirall et al, 2020; Baiker‐Sørensen et al, 2020; Bécue et al, 2020; Butler & Willis, 2020; Chan et al, 2020; Charles et al, 2020; N. S. Jones & Comparin, 2020; Klapec et al, 2020; Lepot et al, 2020; Ludik, 2020; Mattijssen, 2020; Stauffer, 2020). The style and format of the individual reviews vary greatly depending on the topic being covered, some being more descriptive than others in their analyses of the cited references.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The INTERPOL reviews are undertaken by multiple authors who, after extensively surveying the literature, summarize all the information in individual reviews covering specific evidence types, which are combined into one final report. The most recent edition from 2019 covered 15 major topic areas reviewed by 43 authors ranging between 1 and 11 authors per area or per evidence type (Almirall et al, 2020; Baiker‐Sørensen et al, 2020; Bécue et al, 2020; Butler & Willis, 2020; Chan et al, 2020; Charles et al, 2020; N. S. Jones & Comparin, 2020; Klapec et al, 2020; Lepot et al, 2020; Ludik, 2020; Mattijssen, 2020; Stauffer, 2020). The style and format of the individual reviews vary greatly depending on the topic being covered, some being more descriptive than others in their analyses of the cited references.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several topics are represented in order to cover the numerous steps and aspects of this kind of examination, but also to interest various types of readers, from practitioners with different task levels to forensic managers, as well as legal end-users of expert's reports. It is a continuation to our previous review [ 1 ] and covers publications between January 1st , 2019 and December 31st , 2021. Publications from the year 2022 are not included in the present review.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…The forensic literature shows a clear trend towards increasing use of chemometrics (i.e. multivariate analysis and other statistical methods) as already mentioned in the Section 12 (The future) of the previous Interpol review [ 1 ]. Bovens et al [ 10 ] are part of the STEFA-G02 European project which is intended to create a guideline on how to apply chemometrics in forensic drug investigations (but not limited to) as well as developing an open source software tool [ 11 ] to facilitate the application of these methods in a structured way.…”
Section: Generalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The working group also benefits "train the trainer" type arrangements to enhance the knowledge base of examiners by conducting placements at other forensic laboratories within the network. The value of publishing casework has been highlighted as it is through these examples that the most effective training packages can be delivered to peers, policing, and judicial representatives (Lepot et al, 2020).…”
Section: Future Developments and Challengesmentioning
confidence: 99%