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 *

169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23488157)

  • 1. [Effectiveness assessment of 3-D cone beam CT used in human bite marks identification].
    Wu Y; Chen X; Shen Y; Yu J; Tang Y; Zhang Y; Zhu L; Xu Y
    Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi; 2013 Feb; 30(1):157-61, 190. PubMed ID: 23488157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effectiveness of comparison overlays generated with DentalPrint software in bite mark analysis.
    Martin-de las Heras S; Valenzuela A; Javier Valverde A; Torres JC; Luna-del-Castillo JD
    J Forensic Sci; 2007 Jan; 52(1):151-6. PubMed ID: 17209928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A comparison between direct and indirect methods available for human bite mark analysis.
    Kouble RF; Craig GT
    J Forensic Sci; 2004 Jan; 49(1):111-8. PubMed ID: 14979355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Analysis of Intercanine Distance and Dimensional Changes in Bite Marks on Foodstuffs Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography.
    Ali IK; Sansare K; Karjodkar FR
    Am J Forensic Med Pathol; 2018 Sep; 39(3):213-217. PubMed ID: 29652674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Bite mark analysis and comparison using image perception technology.
    van der Velden A; Spiessens M; Willems G
    J Forensic Odontostomatol; 2006 Jun; 24(1):14-7. PubMed ID: 16783951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Analysis of bite marks in foodstuffs by computer tomography (cone beam CT)--3D reconstruction.
    Marques J; Musse J; Caetano C; Corte-Real F; Corte-Real AT
    J Forensic Odontostomatol; 2013 Dec; 31(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 24776435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of simulated human dermal bitemarks possessing three-dimensional attributes to suspected biters using a proprietary three-dimensional comparison.
    Martin-de-las-Heras S; Tafur D
    Forensic Sci Int; 2009 Sep; 190(1-3):33-7. PubMed ID: 19505780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accuracy of bite mark overlays: a comparison of five common methods to produce exemplars from a suspect's dentition.
    Sweet D; Bowers CM
    J Forensic Sci; 1998 Mar; 43(2):362-7. PubMed ID: 9544542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparative study between xerographic, computer-assisted overlay generation and animated-superimposition methods in bite mark analyses.
    Tai MW; Chong ZF; Asif MK; Rahmat RA; Nambiar P
    Leg Med (Tokyo); 2016 Sep; 22():42-8. PubMed ID: 27591538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Comparison of bite marks and teeth features using 2D and 3D methods].
    Lorkiewicz-Muszyńska D; Glapiński M; Zaba C; Łabecka M
    Arch Med Sadowej Kryminol; 2011; 61(2):107-14. PubMed ID: 22390125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 3-D imaging and quantitative comparison of human dentitions and simulated bite marks.
    Blackwell SA; Taylor RV; Gordon I; Ogleby CL; Tanijiri T; Yoshino M; Donald MR; Clement JG
    Int J Legal Med; 2007 Jan; 121(1):9-17. PubMed ID: 16391946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Three-dimensional imaging of human cutaneous forearm bite marks in human volunteers over a 4 day period.
    de Sainte Croix MM; Gauld D; Forgie AH; Lowe R
    J Forensic Leg Med; 2016 May; 40():34-9. PubMed ID: 27010493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Computer-based production of bite mark comparison overlays.
    Sweet D; Parhar M; Wood RE
    J Forensic Sci; 1998 Sep; 43(5):1050-5. PubMed ID: 9729824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Analysis of bite marks].
    Spiessens M; Van der Velden B; Willems G
    Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 2005; 60(3):203-19. PubMed ID: 16370436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Quantitative forensic evaluation of bite marks with the aid of a shape analysis computer program: Part 2; "SCIP" and bite marks in skin and foodstuffs.
    Nambiar P; Bridges TE; Brown KA
    J Forensic Odontostomatol; 1995 Dec; 13(2):26-32. PubMed ID: 9227071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluation of a bitemark using clear acrylic replicas of the suspect's dentition--a case report.
    McKenna CJ; Haron MI; Taylor JA
    J Forensic Odontostomatol; 1999 Dec; 17(2):40-3. PubMed ID: 10709562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A framework for estimating probability of a match in forensic bite mark identification.
    Tuceryan M; Li F; Blitzer HL; Parks ET; Platt JA
    J Forensic Sci; 2011 Jan; 56 Suppl 1():S83-9. PubMed ID: 20887354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Error rates in bite mark analysis in an in vivo animal model.
    Avon SL; Victor C; Mayhall JT; Wood RE
    Forensic Sci Int; 2010 Sep; 201(1-3):45-55. PubMed ID: 20457498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Computer-based production of comparison overlays from 3D-scanned dental casts for bite mark analysis.
    Martin-de las Heras S; Valenzuela A; Ogayar C; Valverde AJ; Torres JC
    J Forensic Sci; 2005 Jan; 50(1):127-33. PubMed ID: 15831006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Application Status and Prospect of Bite Mark Evidence in Forensic Odontology.
    Ma XF; Jin M; Sun H; Mi CB
    Fa Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2020 Jun; 36(3):369-373. PubMed ID: 32705852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.