These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10937313)

  • 1. Children's use of anatomically detailed dolls to report genital touching in a medical examination: developmental and gender comparisons.
    Bruck M; Ceci SJ; Francoeur E
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2000 Mar; 6(1):74-83. PubMed ID: 10937313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Use of nonanatomical dolls in the sexual abuse interview.
    Britton HL; O'Keefe MA
    Child Abuse Negl; 1991; 15(4):567-73. PubMed ID: 1959088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Children's use of anatomically detailed dolls to recount an event.
    Goodman GS; Aman C
    Child Dev; 1990 Dec; 61(6):1859-71. PubMed ID: 2083502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Children's memories of a physical examination involving genital touch: implications for reports of child sexual abuse.
    Saywitz KJ; Goodman GS; Nicholas E; Moan SF
    J Consult Clin Psychol; 1991 Oct; 59(5):682-91. PubMed ID: 1955603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The use of dolls to interview young children: issues of symbolic representation.
    DeLoache JS; Marzolf DP
    J Exp Child Psychol; 1995 Aug; 60(1):155-73. PubMed ID: 7545206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Psychological science and the use of anatomically detailed dolls in child sexual-abuse assessments.
    Koocher GP; Goodman GS; White CS; Friedrich WN; Sivan AB; Reynolds CR
    Psychol Bull; 1995 Sep; 118(2):199-222. PubMed ID: 7568570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Anatomically correct dolls: should they be used as the basis for expert testimony?
    Yates A; Terr L
    J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry; 1988 Mar; 27(2):254-7. PubMed ID: 3360734
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A comparison of sexually abused and nonsexually abused children's behavioral responses to anatomically correct dolls.
    August RL; Forman BD
    Child Psychiatry Hum Dev; 1989; 20(1):39-47. PubMed ID: 2766873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Anatomically-neutral dolls: their effects on the memory and suggestibility of 4- to 6-year-old eyewitnesses.
    Samra J; Yuille JC
    Child Abuse Negl; 1996 Dec; 20(12):1261-72. PubMed ID: 8985617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Interpreting children's labels for sex-related body parts of anatomically explicit dolls.
    Schor DP; Sivan AB
    Child Abuse Negl; 1989; 13(4):523-31. PubMed ID: 2819528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The response of young, non-sexually abused children to anatomically correct dolls.
    Glaser D; Collins C
    J Child Psychol Psychiatry; 1989 Jul; 30(4):547-60. PubMed ID: 2768357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The accuracy of children's reports with anatomically correct dolls.
    Katz SM; Schonfeld DJ; Carter AS; Leventhal JM; Cicchetti DV
    J Dev Behav Pediatr; 1995 Apr; 16(2):71-6. PubMed ID: 7790517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Use of anatomical dolls among professionals in sexual abuse evaluations.
    Boat BW; Everson MD
    Child Abuse Negl; 1988; 12(2):171-9. PubMed ID: 3395893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Issue continued: anatomically correct dolls: should they be used as the basis for expert testimony?
    Yates A; Terr L
    J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry; 1988 May; 27(3):387-8. PubMed ID: 3379023
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Investigative interviews of alleged sexual abuse victims with and without anatomical dolls.
    Lamb ME; Hershkowitz I; Sternberg KJ; Boat B; Everson MD
    Child Abuse Negl; 1996 Dec; 20(12):1251-9. PubMed ID: 8985616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Interaction of normal children with anatomical dolls.
    Sivan AB; Schor DP; Koeppl GK; Noble LD
    Child Abuse Negl; 1988; 12(3):295-304. PubMed ID: 3167619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Exploration of anatomical dolls by nonreferred preschool-aged children: comparisons by age, gender, race, and socioeconomic status.
    Boat BW; Everson MD
    Child Abuse Negl; 1994 Feb; 18(2):139-53. PubMed ID: 8199897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Assumptions and beliefs about the role of AD dolls in child sexual abuse validation interviews: are they supported empirically?
    Skinner LJ
    Behav Sci Law; 1996; 14(2):167-85. PubMed ID: 10160234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Sexual abuse of English boys and girls: the importance of anal examination.
    Hobbs CJ; Wynne JM
    Child Abuse Negl; 1989; 13(2):195-210. PubMed ID: 2743180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Developmental differences in the function and use of anatomical dolls during interviews with alleged sexual abuse victims.
    Thierry KL; Lamb ME; Orbach Y; Pipe ME
    J Consult Clin Psychol; 2005 Dec; 73(6):1125-34. PubMed ID: 16392985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.