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 *

98 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24799165)

  • 1. Uncertainty in the number of contributors for the European Standard Set of loci.
    Curran JM; Buckleton J
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2014 Jul; 11():205-6. PubMed ID: 24799165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Towards understanding the effect of uncertainty in the number of contributors to DNA stains.
    Buckleton JS; Curran JM; Gill P
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2007 Mar; 1(1):20-8. PubMed ID: 19083724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Uncertainty in the number of contributors in the proposed new CODIS set.
    Coble MD; Bright JA; Buckleton JS; Curran JM
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2015 Nov; 19():207-211. PubMed ID: 26275610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Estimating the number of contributors to forensic DNA mixtures: does maximum likelihood perform better than maximum allele count?
    Haned H; Pène L; Lobry JR; Dufour AB; Pontier D
    J Forensic Sci; 2011 Jan; 56(1):23-8. PubMed ID: 20840286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The predictive value of the maximum likelihood estimator of the number of contributors to a DNA mixture.
    Haned H; Pène L; Sauvage F; Pontier D
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2011 Aug; 5(4):281-4. PubMed ID: 20488773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Validation of a DNA mixture statistics tool incorporating allelic drop-out and drop-in.
    Mitchell AA; Tamariz J; O'Connell K; Ducasse N; Budimlija Z; Prinz M; Caragine T
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2012 Dec; 6(6):749-61. PubMed ID: 22999739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Forensic identification of an individual in complex DNA mixtures.
    Voskoboinik L; Darvasi A
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2011 Nov; 5(5):428-35. PubMed ID: 20888313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Inference about the number of contributors to a DNA mixture: Comparative analyses of a Bayesian network approach and the maximum allele count method.
    Biedermann A; Bozza S; Konis K; Taroni F
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2012 Dec; 6(6):689-96. PubMed ID: 22534257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Inferring the number of contributors to mixed DNA profiles.
    Paoletti DR; Krane DE; Raymer ML; Doom TE
    IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform; 2012; 9(1):113-22. PubMed ID: 21519119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Development of a 24-locus multiplex system to incorporate the core loci in the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) and the European Standard Set (ESS).
    Guo F; Shen H; Tian H; Jin P; Jiang X
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2014 Jan; 8(1):44-54. PubMed ID: 24315588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Empirical analysis of the STR profiles resulting from conceptual mixtures.
    Paoletti DR; Doom TE; Krane CM; Raymer ML; Krane DE
    J Forensic Sci; 2005 Nov; 50(6):1361-6. PubMed ID: 16382829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Analysis of global variability in 15 established and 5 new European Standard Set (ESS) STRs using the CEPH human genome diversity panel.
    Phillips C; Fernandez-Formoso L; Garcia-Magariños M; Porras L; Tvedebrink T; Amigo J; Fondevila M; Gomez-Tato A; Alvarez-Dios J; Freire-Aradas A; Gomez-Carballa A; Mosquera-Miguel A; Carracedo A; Lareu MV
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2011 Jun; 5(3):155-69. PubMed ID: 20457091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effect of the uncertainty in the number of contributors to mixed DNA profiles on profile interpretation.
    Bright JA; Curran JM; Buckleton JS
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2014 Sep; 12():208-14. PubMed ID: 25038324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The interpretation of single source and mixed DNA profiles.
    Taylor D; Bright JA; Buckleton J
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2013 Sep; 7(5):516-28. PubMed ID: 23948322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The effect of varying the number of contributors on likelihood ratios for complex DNA mixtures.
    Benschop CCG; Haned H; Jeurissen L; Gill PD; Sijen T
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2015 Nov; 19():92-99. PubMed ID: 26204570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Interpreting Y chromosome STR haplotype mixture.
    Ge J; Budowle B; Chakraborty R
    Leg Med (Tokyo); 2010 May; 12(3):137-43. PubMed ID: 20346725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Evaluation of DNA mixtures from database search.
    Chung YK; Hu YQ; Fung WK
    Biometrics; 2010 Mar; 66(1):233-8. PubMed ID: 19459834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. An illustration of the effect of various sources of uncertainty on DNA likelihood ratio calculations.
    Taylor D; Bright JA; Buckleton J; Curran J
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2014 Jul; 11():56-63. PubMed ID: 24667729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.