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 *

167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23339121)

  • 1. Valuing structured professional judgment: predictive validity, decision-making, and the clinical-actuarial conflict.
    Falzer PR
    Behav Sci Law; 2013; 31(1):40-54. PubMed ID: 23339121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Predictive validity performance indicators in violence risk assessment: a methodological primer.
    Singh JP
    Behav Sci Law; 2013; 31(1):8-22. PubMed ID: 23408459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sexual offenders: a meta-analysis of 118 prediction studies.
    Hanson RK; Morton-Bourgon KE
    Psychol Assess; 2009 Mar; 21(1):1-21. PubMed ID: 19290762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Improving forensic tribunal decisions: the role of the clinician.
    McKee SA; Harris GT; Rice ME
    Behav Sci Law; 2007; 25(4):485-506. PubMed ID: 17620273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Improving Criminal Responsibility Determinations Using Structured Professional Judgment.
    Acklin MW; Velasquez JP
    Front Psychol; 2021; 12():700991. PubMed ID: 34326801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Structured risk assessment in community forensic mental health practice.
    Green B; Carroll A; Brett A
    Australas Psychiatry; 2010 Dec; 18(6):538-41. PubMed ID: 21117840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Operationalizing the assessment and management of violence risk in the short-term.
    Doyle M; Logan C
    Behav Sci Law; 2012; 30(4):406-19. PubMed ID: 22753147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Assessment of dynamic risk factors: an independent validation study of the Violence Risk Scale: Sexual Offender Version.
    Beggs SM; Grace RC
    Sex Abuse; 2010 Jun; 22(2):234-51. PubMed ID: 20458126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Interrater reliability, concurrent validity, and predictive validity of the risk for sexual violence protocol.
    Vargen LM; Jackson KJ; Hart SD
    Law Hum Behav; 2020 Feb; 44(1):37-50. PubMed ID: 31697098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Does using nonnumerical terms to describe risk aid violence risk communication? Clinician agreement and decision making.
    Zoe Hilton N; Carter AM; Harris GT; Sharpe AJ
    J Interpers Violence; 2008 Feb; 23(2):171-88. PubMed ID: 18162635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Clinical judgment and decision making.
    Garb HN
    Annu Rev Clin Psychol; 2005; 1():67-89. PubMed ID: 17716082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Measurement of predictive validity in violence risk assessment studies: a second-order systematic review.
    Singh JP; Desmarais SL; Van Dorn RA
    Behav Sci Law; 2013; 31(1):55-73. PubMed ID: 23444299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Alice in actuarial-land: through the looking glass of changing Static-99 norms.
    Sreenivasan S; Weinberger LE; Frances A; Cusworth-Walker S
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2010; 38(3):400-6. PubMed ID: 20852227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Adaptive decision making in a dynamic environment: a test of a sequential sampling model of relative judgment.
    Vuckovic A; Kwantes PJ; Neal A
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2013 Sep; 19(3):266-84. PubMed ID: 24059826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth in secondary educational settings.
    McGowan MR; Horn RA; Mellott RN
    Psychol Assess; 2011 Jun; 23(2):478-86. PubMed ID: 21381837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Risk assessment in child protective services: consensus and actuarial model reliability.
    Baird C; Wagner D; Healy T; Johnson K
    Child Welfare; 1999; 78(6):723-48. PubMed ID: 10627988
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The influence of actuarial risk assessment in clinical judgments and tribunal decisions about mentally disordered offenders in maximum security.
    Hilton NZ; Simmons JL
    Law Hum Behav; 2001 Aug; 25(4):393-408. PubMed ID: 11501440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Version 3 of the historical-clinical-risk management-20 (HCR-20V3): relevance to violence risk assessment and management in forensic conditional release contexts.
    Douglas KS
    Behav Sci Law; 2014 Sep; 32(5):557-76. PubMed ID: 25278316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The San Francisco Syncope Rule vs physician judgment and decision making.
    Quinn JV; Stiell IG; McDermott DA; Kohn MA; Wells GA
    Am J Emerg Med; 2005 Oct; 23(6):782-6. PubMed ID: 16182988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Judgment and decision making.
    Mellers BA; Schwartz A; Cooke AD
    Annu Rev Psychol; 1998; 49():447-77. PubMed ID: 9496629
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.