Forensic significance of condom traces in sexual assault investigations: A systematic review

Saule Mussabekova, Nunzianda Frascione, Laura B Assylbayeva

2025

Full text Open access: Hybrid Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.1016/j.scijus.2025.101341
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

• A systematic review of condom trace evidence in sexual assault investigations is presented. • Analytical methods for detecting condom residues in biological samples are critically evaluated. • Key spectroscopic and chromatographic techniques are identified for their forensic value. • Methodological limitations, including sampling variability and trace persistence, are examined. • The review highlights the need for standardised protocols to enhance evidence recovery and interpretation. This systematic review examines the forensic value of condom residue detection in biological samples, particularly in sexual assault investigations where DNA evidence is absent. Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across seven databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Google Scholar), two trial registers ( ClinicalTrials.gov , WHO ICTRP), and four grey literature sources (PQDT, WorldCat, OATD, F1000). Studies published in English from January 1, 2020, to February 28, 2025, were screened using predefined PICO(S) criteria. Eight eligible studies involving human matrices were included. The analytical techniques assessed included DRIFTS-FTIR, ATR-FTIR, Py-GC/MS, GC–MS, and sfPESI-MS. DRIFTS-FTIR demonstrated strong spectral resolution for detecting PDMS-based silicone lubricants, while ATR-FTIR achieved 100 % classification accuracy under controlled laboratory conditions. The combination of spectroscopic and chromatographic techniques (e.g., ATR-FTIR + GC–MS) yielded more reliable and confirmatory results. The risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool for experimental studies and the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for case reports. Key limitations included small sample sizes, variability in collection protocols, and the lack of validated field methods. Overall, the findings highlight the need for methodological integration and standardisation in forensic lubricant trace analysis. PROSPERO registration: CRD420251004301. No external funding was received.