369 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16082863)
1. Admissibility of scientific evidence in courts.
Davies J
Med Law; 2005 Jun; 24(2):243-57. PubMed ID: 16082863
[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. What has a decade of Daubert wrought?
Berger MA
Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S59-65. PubMed ID: 16030340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Trial and error: the Supreme Court's philosophy of science.
Haack S
Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S66-73. PubMed ID: 16030341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Application of the Supreme Court's Daubert criteria in radiation litigation.
Merwin SE; Moeller DW; Kennedy WE; Moeller MP
Health Phys; 2001 Dec; 81(6):670-7. PubMed ID: 11725885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Kumho, Daubert, and the nature of scientific inquiry: implications for forensic anthropology.
Grivas CR; Komar DA
J Forensic Sci; 2008 Jul; 53(4):771-6. PubMed ID: 18489550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Psychological evidence at the dawn of the law's scientific age.
Faigman DL; Monahan J
Annu Rev Psychol; 2005; 56():631-59. PubMed ID: 15709949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Quantitative EEG and the Frye and Daubert standards of admissibility.
Thatcher RW; Biver CJ; North DM
Clin Electroencephalogr; 2003 Apr; 34(2):39-53. PubMed ID: 12784902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Admissibility of scientific evidence post-Daubert.
Masten J; Strzelczyk JJ
Health Phys; 2001 Dec; 81(6):678-82. PubMed ID: 11725886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael.
Grudzinskas AJ
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1999; 27(3):482-8. PubMed ID: 10509947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. The case against differential diagnosis: Daubert, medical causation testimony, and the scientific method.
Hollingsworth JG; Lasker EG
J Health Law; 2004; 37(1):85-111. PubMed ID: 15191237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Expert scientific evidence in the Israeli court.
Sahar A
Med Law; 2007 Jun; 26(2):257-82. PubMed ID: 17639850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The physician expert witness and the U.S. Supreme court--an epidemiologic approach.
Norton ML
Med Law; 2002; 21(3):435-49. PubMed ID: 12437195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Meeting a Forensic Podiatry Admissibility Challenge: A Daubert Case Study.
Nirenberg M
J Forensic Sci; 2016 May; 61(3):833-841. PubMed ID: 27122428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. The admissibility of expert evidence in Canada.
Glancy GD; Bradford JM
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2007; 35(3):350-6. PubMed ID: 17872558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Forensic identification science evidence since Daubert: Part I--A quantitative analysis of the exclusion of forensic identification science evidence.
Page M; Taylor J; Blenkin M
J Forensic Sci; 2011 Sep; 56(5):1180-4. PubMed ID: 21884119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
