![Sample our Environment & Agriculture journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5934/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Environment-Agriculture.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Recent criticism of forensic science has focused on the fundamental aspects of the science, including the lack of supporting empirical studies, validation, accreditation, limitations and error rates. Proficiency tests are an essential component of accreditation and can be used to evaluate laboratory performance and identify systematic issues within components of the service provision. In 2016 we reported on the results of an analysis of 3176 CTS proficiency tests undertaken between 2005 and 2015 by Australian government service providers. The data analysed represented 43 unique CTS test types and covered 21 disciplines. Here we present further data from 2016 to 2017 and compare these results with those obtained from the previous study. These combined results further demonstrate that errors exist even though practitioners know they are examining proficiency tests and the tests undergo a review process. This study illustrates the need to continue to monitor trends in proficiency test results and also further highlights the need for well-designed, relevant, blind error rate studies to determine the approximate error rates for casework.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.