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 *

115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25450791)

  • 1. The variability in likelihood ratios due to different mechanisms.
    Bright JA; Stevenson KE; Curran JM; Buckleton JS
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2015 Jan; 14():187-90. PubMed ID: 25450791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A series of recommended tests when validating probabilistic DNA profile interpretation software.
    Bright JA; Evett IW; Taylor D; Curran JM; Buckleton J
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2015 Jan; 14():125-31. PubMed ID: 25450783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Internal validation of STRmix™ for the interpretation of single source and mixed DNA profiles.
    Moretti TR; Just RS; Kehl SC; Willis LE; Buckleton JS; Bright JA; Taylor DA; Onorato AJ
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2017 Jul; 29():126-144. PubMed ID: 28504203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Developmental validation of STRmix™, expert software for the interpretation of forensic DNA profiles.
    Bright JA; Taylor D; McGovern C; Cooper S; Russell L; Abarno D; Buckleton J
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 Jul; 23():226-239. PubMed ID: 27235797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Investigating a common approach to DNA profile interpretation using probabilistic software.
    Cooper S; McGovern C; Bright JA; Taylor D; Buckleton J
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2015 May; 16():121-131. PubMed ID: 25596557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Systematic evaluation of STRmix™ performance on degraded DNA profile data.
    Duke KR; Myers SP
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Jan; 44():102174. PubMed ID: 31707114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The Probabilistic Genotyping Software STRmix: Utility and Evidence for its Validity.
    Buckleton JS; Bright JA; Gittelson S; Moretti TR; Onorato AJ; Bieber FR; Budowle B; Taylor DA
    J Forensic Sci; 2019 Mar; 64(2):393-405. PubMed ID: 30132900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Hamiltonian Monte Carlo with strict convergence criteria reduces run-to-run variability in forensic DNA mixture deconvolution.
    Susik M; Schönborn H; Sbalzarini IF
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2022 Sep; 60():102744. PubMed ID: 35853341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Interpreting forensic DNA profiling evidence without specifying the number of contributors.
    Taylor D; Bright JA; Buckleton J
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2014 Nov; 13():269-80. PubMed ID: 25261845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Exact likelihood-free Markov chain Monte Carlo for elliptically contoured distributions.
    Muchmore P; Marjoram P
    Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol; 2015 Aug; 14(4):317-32. PubMed ID: 26167984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A MCMC method for resolving two person mixtures.
    Curran JM
    Sci Justice; 2008 Dec; 48(4):168-77. PubMed ID: 19192678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A comparison of likelihood ratios obtained from EuroForMix and STRmix™.
    Cheng K; Bleka Ø; Gill P; Curran J; Bright JA; Taylor D; Buckleton J
    J Forensic Sci; 2021 Nov; 66(6):2138-2155. PubMed ID: 34553371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A collaborative study on the precision of the Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms used for DNA profile interpretation.
    Riman S; Bright JA; Huffman K; Moreno LI; Liu S; Sathya A; Vallone PM
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2024 Jun; 72():103088. PubMed ID: 38908322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Markov chain Monte Carlo: an introduction for epidemiologists.
    Hamra G; MacLehose R; Richardson D
    Int J Epidemiol; 2013 Apr; 42(2):627-34. PubMed ID: 23569196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A new methodological framework to interpret complex DNA profiles using likelihood ratios.
    Gill P; Haned H
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2013 Feb; 7(2):251-63. PubMed ID: 23245914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Do low template DNA profiles have useful quantitative data?
    Taylor D; Buckleton J
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2015 May; 16():13-16. PubMed ID: 25474687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Identifiability of parameters and behaviour of MCMC chains: a case study using the reaction norm model.
    Shariati MM; Korsgaard IR; Sorensen D
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2009 Apr; 126(2):92-102. PubMed ID: 19320765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Assessing the convergence of Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods: an example from evaluation of diagnostic tests in absence of a gold standard.
    Toft N; Innocent GT; Gettinby G; Reid SW
    Prev Vet Med; 2007 May; 79(2-4):244-56. PubMed ID: 17292499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Phylogenetic MCMC algorithms are misleading on mixtures of trees.
    Mossel E; Vigoda E
    Science; 2005 Sep; 309(5744):2207-9. PubMed ID: 16195459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.