146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23810238)
1. A general approach to power calculation for relationship testing.
Egeland T; Pinto N; Vigeland MD
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2014 Mar; 9():186-90. PubMed ID: 23810238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Resolving relationship tests that show ambiguous STR results using autosomal SNPs as supplementary markers.
Phillips C; Fondevila M; García-Magariños M; Rodriguez A; Salas A; Carracedo A; Lareu MV
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2008 Jun; 2(3):198-204. PubMed ID: 19083821
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Paternity exclusion power: comparative behaviour of autosomal and X-chromosomal markers in standard and deficient cases with inbreeding.
Pinto N; Gusmão L; Egeland T; Amorim A
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2013 Feb; 7(2):290-5. PubMed ID: 23312390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Familias 3 - Extensions and new functionality.
Kling D; Tillmar AO; Egeland T
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2014 Nov; 13():121-7. PubMed ID: 25113576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluating the statistical power of DNA-based identification, exemplified by 'The missing grandchildren of Argentina'.
Kling D; Egeland T; Piñero MH; Vigeland MD
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2017 Nov; 31():57-66. PubMed ID: 28858673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. On identification problems requiring linked autosomal markers.
Egeland T; Sheehan N
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2008 Jun; 2(3):219-25. PubMed ID: 19083824
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Pedigree-based relationship inference from complex DNA mixtures.
Dørum G; Kaur N; Gysi M
Int J Legal Med; 2017 May; 131(3):629-641. PubMed ID: 28101646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Object-oriented Bayesian networks for complex forensic DNA profiling problems.
Dawid AP; Mortera J; Vicard P
Forensic Sci Int; 2007 Jul; 169(2-3):195-205. PubMed ID: 17055679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Informativeness of genetic markers for pairwise relationship and relatedness inference.
Wang J
Theor Popul Biol; 2006 Nov; 70(3):300-21. PubMed ID: 16388833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The likelihood ratio as a random variable for linked markers in kinship analysis.
Egeland T; Slooten K
Int J Legal Med; 2016 Nov; 130(6):1445-1456. PubMed ID: 27519910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Genotype probabilities of pairs of individuals for X-chromosome markers.
Toni C; Domenici R; Presciuttini S
Transfusion; 2007 Jul; 47(7):1276-80. PubMed ID: 17581164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Key individuals for discerning pedigrees belonging to the same autosomal kinship class.
Gonçalves J; Conde-Sousa E; Egeland T; Amorim A; Pinto N
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2017 Jul; 29():71-79. PubMed ID: 28380400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Validation of DNA-based identification software by computation of pedigree likelihood ratios.
Slooten K
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2011 Aug; 5(4):308-15. PubMed ID: 20727843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A general method to assess the utility of the X-chromosomal markers in kinship testing.
Pinto N; Silva PV; Amorim A
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2012 Mar; 6(2):198-207. PubMed ID: 21592877
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. DNA-based paternity analysis and genetic evaluation in a large, commercial cattle ranch setting.
Van Eenennaam AL; Weaber RL; Drake DJ; Penedo MC; Quaas RL; Garrick DJ; Pollak EJ
J Anim Sci; 2007 Dec; 85(12):3159-69. PubMed ID: 17878282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Paternity testing and other inference about relationships from DNA mixtures.
Green PJ; Mortera J
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2017 May; 28():128-137. PubMed ID: 28314238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Power of exclusion revisited: probability of excluding relatives of the true father from paternity.
Fung WK; Chung YK; Wong DM
Int J Legal Med; 2002 Apr; 116(2):64-7. PubMed ID: 12056522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Analysis of a claimed distant relationship in a deficient pedigree using high density SNP data.
Lareu MV; García-Magariños M; Phillips C; Quintela I; Carracedo A; Salas A
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2012 May; 6(3):350-3. PubMed ID: 21868300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Calculating the exclusion probability and paternity index for X-chromosomal loci in the presence of substructure.
Ayres KL; Powley WM
Forensic Sci Int; 2005 May; 149(2-3):201-3. PubMed ID: 15749362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Prioritising family members for genotyping in missing person cases: A general approach combining the statistical power of exclusion and inclusion.
Vigeland MD; Marsico FL; Herrera Piñero M; Egeland T
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Nov; 49():102376. PubMed ID: 32979623
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
