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.
1250 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11568465)
1. Neurolitigation: a perspective on the elements of expert testimony for extending the Daubert challenge. Klee CH; Friedman HJ NeuroRehabilitation; 2001; 16(2):79-85. PubMed ID: 11568465 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Handwriting Evidence in Federal Courts - From Frye to Kumho. Zlotnick J; Lin JR Forensic Sci Rev; 2001 Jul; 13(2):87-99. PubMed ID: 26256304 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Promoting ethical and objective practice in the medicolegal arena of disability evaluation. Martelli MF; Zasler ND; Johnson-Greene D Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am; 2001 Aug; 12(3):571-85. PubMed ID: 11478189 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Psychological expert witness testimony and judicial decision making trends. Shapiro DL; Mixon L; Jackson M; Shook J Int J Law Psychiatry; 2015; 42-43():149-53. PubMed ID: 26341310 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Fixed vs. flexible neuropsychological test batteries under the Daubert standard for the admissibility of scientific evidence. Reed JE Behav Sci Law; 1996; 14(3):315-22. PubMed ID: 8963383 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Admissibility of neuropsychological testimony after Daubert and Kumho. Stern BH NeuroRehabilitation; 2001; 16(2):93-101. PubMed ID: 11568467 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The admissibility of hypnotic evidence in U.S. Courts. Giannelli PC Int J Clin Exp Hypn; 1995 Apr; 43(2):212-33. PubMed ID: 7737764 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The expert witness: understanding the rationale. Brenner RJ J Am Coll Radiol; 2007 Sep; 4(9):612-6. PubMed ID: 17845966 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Independent judicial research in the Daubert age. Cheng EK Duke Law J; 2007 Mar; 56(5):1263-318. PubMed ID: 17593589 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals: a new standard for scientific evidence in the courts? Zonana H Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1994; 22(3):309-25. PubMed ID: 7841504 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Judicial gatekeeping and the social construction of the admissibility of expert testimony. Merlino ML; Murray CI; Richardson JT Behav Sci Law; 2008; 26(2):187-206. PubMed ID: 18344168 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Neuropsychiatry at the Courtroom Gates: Selective Entry or Anything Goes? Brakel SJ; Gonzalez ER; Cavanaugh JL Semin Clin Neuropsychiatry; 1996 Jul; 1(3):215-221. PubMed ID: 10320423 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Opinions and testimony of expert witnesses and independent medical evaluators. Schofferman J Pain Med; 2007; 8(4):376-82. PubMed ID: 17610460 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. False confessions, expert testimony, and admissibility. Watson C; Weiss KJ; Pouncey C J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2010; 38(2):174-86. PubMed ID: 20542936 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The impact of the Daubert case on modern litigation. Mavroforou A; Michalodimitrakis E Med Law; 2008 Dec; 27(4):755-65. PubMed ID: 19202854 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Admissibility of scientific evidence in courts. Davies J Med Law; 2005 Jun; 24(2):243-57. PubMed ID: 16082863 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The effectiveness of opposing expert witnesses for educating jurors about unreliable expert evidence. Levett LM; Kovera MB Law Hum Behav; 2008 Aug; 32(4):363-74. PubMed ID: 17940854 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Risk assessment in the law: legal admissibility, scientific validity, and some disparities between research and practice. Krauss DA; Scurich N Behav Sci Law; 2013; 31(2):215-29. PubMed ID: 23613165 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Lessons from Canadian Courts for All Expert Witnesses. Booth BD; Watts J; Dufour M J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2019 Aug; 47(3):278-285. PubMed ID: 31097525 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]