Final answer:
It depends on the lab's policies whether a brief summary of case history should be included with submitted evidence, as practices vary. Including a summary can provide beneficial context, but it might also introduce bias, illustrating why policies may differ.
Step-by-step explanation:
Whether evidence submitted to a lab should contain a brief summary of case history can be influenced by the lab's policies and procedures. Generally, it's considered good practice to include a summary to provide context to the lab technicians, which can help them understand the specifics of the case and tailor their analysis accordingly. For example, in a forensic lab, knowing the details of the case may allow technicians to prioritize certain tests over others or be alert to particular types of evidence.
However, the inclusion of a case summary also runs the risk of creating bias in the analysis. To mitigate this, some labs operate under a 'blind' system where technicians analyze evidence without case context to maintain objectivity. As such, the answer here is It depends on the lab's policies. This is because different labs have different protocols regarding the submission of evidence, some may require a case summary, while others might not.