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 *

377 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23613165)

  • 1. Risk assessment in the law: legal admissibility, scientific validity, and some disparities between research and practice.
    Krauss DA; Scurich N
    Behav Sci Law; 2013; 31(2):215-29. PubMed ID: 23613165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Inconsistency in evidentiary standards for medical testimony: disorder in the courts.
    Kassirer JP; Cecil JS
    JAMA; 2002 Sep; 288(11):1382-7. PubMed ID: 12234232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The admissibility of hypnotic evidence in U.S. Courts.
    Giannelli PC
    Int J Clin Exp Hypn; 1995 Apr; 43(2):212-33. PubMed ID: 7737764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Admissibility of scientific evidence in courts.
    Davies J
    Med Law; 2005 Jun; 24(2):243-57. PubMed ID: 16082863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Admissibility and per se exclusion of hypnotically elicited recall in American courts of law.
    Perry C
    Int J Clin Exp Hypn; 1997 Jul; 45(3):266-79. PubMed ID: 9204639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. False confessions, expert testimony, and admissibility.
    Watson C; Weiss KJ; Pouncey C
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2010; 38(2):174-86. PubMed ID: 20542936
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evolving legal standards for the admissibility of scientific evidence.
    Black B
    Science; 1988 Mar; 239(4847):1508-12. PubMed ID: 3281252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Expert psychological testimony on eyewitness reliability before and after Daubert: the state of the law and the science.
    Penrod SD; Fulero SM; Cutler BL
    Behav Sci Law; 1995; 13(2):229-59. PubMed ID: 10150378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Expert psychiatric evidence in sexual misconduct cases before state medical boards.
    Hyams AL
    Am J Law Med; 1992; 18(3):171-201. PubMed ID: 1288304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A consideration of challenges to psychological assessment instruments used in forensic settings: Rorschach as exemplar.
    Hilsenroth MJ; Stricker G
    J Pers Assess; 2004 Oct; 83(2):141-52. PubMed ID: 15456650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI) and expert testimony.
    Kulich R; Maciewicz R; Scrivani SJ
    Pain Med; 2009 Mar; 10(2):373-80. PubMed ID: 19254335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Juror and expert conceptions of battered women.
    Dodge M; Greene E
    Violence Vict; 1991; 6(4):271-82. PubMed ID: 1822697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. The impact of the Daubert case on modern litigation.
    Mavroforou A; Michalodimitrakis E
    Med Law; 2008 Dec; 27(4):755-65. PubMed ID: 19202854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A hybrid decision framework for evaluating psychometric evidence.
    Marlowe DB
    Behav Sci Law; 1995; 13(2):207-28. PubMed ID: 10150377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 19.