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 *

426 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20488773)

  • 41. PACE: Probabilistic Assessment for Contributor Estimation- A machine learning-based assessment of the number of contributors in DNA mixtures.
    Marciano MA; Adelman JD
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2017 Mar; 27():82-91. PubMed ID: 28040630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Application of random match probability calculations to mixed STR profiles.
    Bille T; Bright JA; Buckleton J
    J Forensic Sci; 2013 Mar; 58(2):474-85. PubMed ID: 23425220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Mixture interpretation: defining the relevant features for guidelines for the assessment of mixed DNA profiles in forensic casework.
    Budowle B; Onorato AJ; Callaghan TF; Della Manna A; Gross AM; Guerrieri RA; Luttman JC; McClure DL
    J Forensic Sci; 2009 Jul; 54(4):810-21. PubMed ID: 19368620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Joint Bayesian analysis of forensic mixtures.
    Pascali VL; Merigioli S
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2012 Dec; 6(6):735-48. PubMed ID: 22948016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Distinguishing between donors and their relatives in complex DNA mixtures with binary models.
    Slooten K
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 Mar; 21():95-109. PubMed ID: 26745184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Least-square deconvolution: a framework for interpreting short tandem repeat mixtures.
    Wang T; Xue N; Birdwell JD
    J Forensic Sci; 2006 Nov; 51(6):1284-97. PubMed ID: 17199614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Complex mixtures: a critical examination of a paper by Homer et al.
    Egeland T; Fonneløp AE; Berg PR; Kent M; Lien S
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2012 Jan; 6(1):64-9. PubMed ID: 21429835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Mixture interpretation: Experimental and simulated reevaluation of qualitative analysis.
    Manabe S; Mori Y; Kawai C; Ozeki M; Tamaki K
    Leg Med (Tokyo); 2013 Mar; 15(2):66-71. PubMed ID: 23089142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Development and validation of open-source software for DNA mixture interpretation based on a quantitative continuous model.
    Manabe S; Morimoto C; Hamano Y; Fujimoto S; Tamaki K
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(11):e0188183. PubMed ID: 29149210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Exact computation of the distribution of likelihood ratios with forensic applications.
    Dørum G; Bleka Ø; Gill P; Haned H; Snipen L; Sæbø S; Egeland T
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2014 Mar; 9():93-101. PubMed ID: 24528587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. LoComatioN: a software tool for the analysis of low copy number DNA profiles.
    Gill P; Kirkham A; Curran J
    Forensic Sci Int; 2007 Mar; 166(2-3):128-38. PubMed ID: 16759831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Contributors are a nuisance (parameter) for DNA mixture evidence evaluation.
    Slooten K; Caliebe A
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Nov; 37():116-125. PubMed ID: 30145539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Bayesian and maximum likelihood estimation of genetic maps.
    York TL; Durrett RT; Tanksley S; Nielsen R
    Genet Res; 2005 Apr; 85(2):159-68. PubMed ID: 16174334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. A large-scale validation of NOCIt's a posteriori probability of the number of contributors and its integration into forensic interpretation pipelines.
    Grgicak CM; Karkar S; Yearwood-Garcia X; Alfonse LE; Duffy KR; Lun DS
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Jul; 47():102296. PubMed ID: 32339916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Characterizing the genetic structure of a forensic DNA database using a latent variable approach.
    Kruijver M
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 Jul; 23():130-149. PubMed ID: 27128695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. CEESIt: A computational tool for the interpretation of STR mixtures.
    Swaminathan H; Garg A; Grgicak CM; Medard M; Lun DS
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 May; 22():149-160. PubMed ID: 26946255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. PENDULUM--a guideline-based approach to the interpretation of STR mixtures.
    Bill M; Gill P; Curran J; Clayton T; Pinchin R; Healy M; Buckleton J
    Forensic Sci Int; 2005 Mar; 148(2-3):181-9. PubMed ID: 15639613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Value of DNA tests: a decision perspective.
    Taroni F; Bozza S; Bernard M; Champod C
    J Forensic Sci; 2007 Jan; 52(1):31-9. PubMed ID: 17209907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Legal standards and the significance of DNA evidence.
    Gomulkiewicz R; Slade NA
    Hum Biol; 1997 Oct; 69(5):675-88. PubMed ID: 9299887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Calculating likelihood ratios for a mixed DNA profile when a contribution from a genetic relative of a suspect is proposed.
    Puch-Solis R; Pope S; Evett I
    Sci Justice; 2010 Dec; 50(4):205-9. PubMed ID: 21075300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 22.