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 *

217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20120610)

  • 61. Likelihood ratios for deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) typing in criminal cases.
    Jarjoura D; Jamison J; Androulakakis S
    J Forensic Sci; 1994 Jan; 39(1):64-73. PubMed ID: 8113714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. Issues in the application of Bayes' Theorem to child abuse decision making.
    Proeve M
    Child Maltreat; 2009 Feb; 14(1):114-20. PubMed ID: 18495947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. Automatic forensic face recognition from digital images.
    Peacock C; Goode A; Brett A
    Sci Justice; 2004; 44(1):29-34. PubMed ID: 14964819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. [Genetic investigations in forensic medicine].
    Lászik A; Szakács O; Sótonyi P
    Orv Hetil; 2002 May; 143(21):1183-6. PubMed ID: 12073538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. On the Bayesian approach to forensic age estimation of living individuals.
    Sironi E; Vuille J; Morling N; Taroni F
    Forensic Sci Int; 2017 Dec; 281():e24-e29. PubMed ID: 29162298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. [Objective evaluation of dysphonia. Possibilities and limitations].
    Di Nicola V; Fiorella ML; Luperto P; Staffieri A; Fiorella R
    Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital; 2001 Feb; 21(1):10-21. PubMed ID: 11434219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. SuperTRI: A new approach based on branch support analyses of multiple independent data sets for assessing reliability of phylogenetic inferences.
    Ropiquet A; Li B; Hassanin A
    C R Biol; 2009 Sep; 332(9):832-47. PubMed ID: 19748458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 68. Forensic science. Journal flinches as article on voice analyzer sparks lawsuit threat.
    Cho A
    Science; 2009 Feb; 323(5916):863. PubMed ID: 19213884
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. The distribution of forensic journals, reflections on authorship practices, peer-review and role of the impact factor.
    Jones AW
    Forensic Sci Int; 2007 Jan; 165(2-3):115-28. PubMed ID: 16784827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. Spectrographic voice identification: a forensic survey.
    Koenig BE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1986 Jun; 79(6):2088-90. PubMed ID: 3722616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. Assessing transfer probabilities in a Bayesian interpretation of forensic glass evidence.
    Curran JM; Triggs CM; Buckleton JS; Walsh K; Hicks T
    Sci Justice; 1998; 38(1):15-21. PubMed ID: 9624809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. DNA evidence, probabilistic evaluation and collaborative tests.
    Taroni F; Aitken CG
    Forensic Sci Int; 2000 Feb; 108(2):121-43. PubMed ID: 10722199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. Using continuous DNA interpretation methods to revisit likelihood ratio behaviour.
    Taylor D
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2014 Jul; 11():144-53. PubMed ID: 24727432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Commentary on: Thompson WC, Taroni F, Aitken CGG. How the probability of a false positive affects the value of DNA evidence. J Forensic Sci 2003;48(1):47-54.
    Brenner CH; Inman K
    J Forensic Sci; 2004 Jan; 49(1):192-3; author reply 194-5. PubMed ID: 14979377
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. Commentary on: Thompson WC, Taroni F, Aitken CGG. How the probability of a false positive affects the value of DNA evidence. J Forensic Sci 2003;48(1):47-54.
    Cotton RW; Word CJ
    J Forensic Sci; 2003 Sep; 48(5):1200; author reply 1202. PubMed ID: 14535702
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. Reply to Morrison et al. (2016) Refining the relevant population in forensic voice comparison - A response to Hicks et alii (2015) The importance of distinguishing information from evidence/observations when formulating propositions.
    Hicks T; Biedermann A; de Koeijer JA; Taroni F; Champod C; Evett IW
    Sci Justice; 2017 Sep; 57(5):401-402. PubMed ID: 28889871
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. Lead isotope ratios for bullets, forensic evaluation in a Bayesian paradigm.
    Sjåstad KE; Lucy D; Andersen T
    Talanta; 2016 Jan; 146():62-70. PubMed ID: 26695235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. Commentary on: Thompson WC, Taroni F, Aitken CGG. How the probability of a false positive affects the value of DNA evidence. J Forensic Sci 2003 Jan.;48(1):47-54.
    Clarke GW
    J Forensic Sci; 2003 Sep; 48(5):1201; author reply 1202. PubMed ID: 14535703
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. What should a forensic practitioner's likelihood ratio be?
    Morrison GS; Enzinger E
    Sci Justice; 2016 Sep; 56(5):374-379. PubMed ID: 27702454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80. Questions, propositions and assessing different levels of evidence: Forensic voice comparison in practice.
    Hughes V; Rhodes R
    Sci Justice; 2018 Jul; 58(4):250-257. PubMed ID: 29895456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.