The barriers to achieving an evidence base for bitemark analysis

Area of Science:

• Forensic Science
• Forensic Dentistry
• Bitemark Analysis

Background:

• Both forensic science and dentistry are increasingly emphasizing scientific rigor and evidence-based practices.
• The Daubert ruling mandates rigorous scientific validation for expert testimony, including error rates and reliability studies.
• Forensic dentistry, particularly bitemark analysis, lags in addressing evidence base deficiencies, with most literature being case reports.

Purpose of the Study:

• To review existing studies on bitemark analysis, focusing on the uniqueness of human dentition, overlay techniques, and statistical probabilities.
• To highlight the deficiencies in the evidence base for bitemark analysis.
• To emphasize the urgent need for high-quality research to meet scientific and legal scrutiny.

Main Methods:

• Literature review of studies assessing aspects of bitemark analysis.
• Discussion of barriers to high-quality research in the field.
• Identification of research needs for bitemark analysis.

Main Results:

• The vast majority of published works in bitemark analysis are case reports, with limited primary literature.
• Significant barriers exist for high-quality research, including the lack of a forensically relevant gold standard.
• There is a critical need to study how dental uniqueness is represented on skin and other substrates, and to determine procedural and individual error rates.

Conclusions:

• Bitemark analysis requires urgent, high-quality research to meet the scientific and legal scrutiny applied to other forensic disciplines.
• Studies are needed to validate the representation of dental uniqueness on various substrates and to establish error rates.
• Validated scales and interpretative indices for bitemark severity and forensic significance should be developed and implemented.