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.
99 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25636562)
1. Admissibility of scientific evidence. Jerrold L Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2015 Feb; 147(2):270-1. PubMed ID: 25636562 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. US Supreme Court decisions, expert testimony, and implant dentistry. Flanagan D J Oral Implantol; 2002; 28(2):97-8. PubMed ID: 12498453 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Forensic dentistry. Civil litigation and the narrative report. Chrz B J Okla Dent Assoc; 1997; 88(2):31, 42, 54. PubMed ID: 9540705 [No 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. The Forensic Dentist: An Overview of Expert Roles in Animal Bite-Mark Investigations. Cohrn K; Berman R J Calif Dent Assoc; 2015 Jun; 43(6):321-30. PubMed ID: 26126348 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Guidelines for expert testimony in implant dentistry. Flanagan D J Oral Implantol; 2002; 28(2):99-100. PubMed ID: 12498454 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The judicial view of bitemarks within the United States Criminal Justice System. Pretty IA; Sweet DJ J Forensic Odontostomatol; 2006 Jun; 24(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 16783949 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The merits of the paternalistic justification for restrictions on the admissibility of expert evidence. Sanders J Seton Hall Law Rev; 2003; 33(4):881-941. PubMed ID: 14626262 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Review of a forensic pseudoscience: Identification of criminals from bitemark patterns. Bowers CM J Forensic Leg Med; 2019 Feb; 61():34-39. PubMed ID: 30447642 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Judicial gatekeeping and the social construction of the admissibility of expert testimony. Merlino ML; Murray CI; Richardson JT Behav Sci Law; 2008; 26(2):187-206. PubMed ID: 18344168 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Odontology as a forensic science, the North American experience. Barsley RE Forensic Sci Int; 2010 Sep; 201(1-3):5-7. PubMed ID: 20304574 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Jurisprudence issues in forensic odontology. Bowers CM Dent Clin North Am; 2001 Apr; 45(2):399-415, ix. PubMed ID: 11370461 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The truth about expert witnesses. Byers MM J Colo Dent Assoc; 2000; 79(4):14-5. PubMed ID: 11404934 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. [Criteria of expert assessment of professional errors in dentistry]. Popova TG Sud Med Ekspert; 2007; 50(6):25-7. PubMed ID: 18159756 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Is there any indication for ethics evidence? An argument for the admissibility of some expert bioethics testimony. Nelson LJ J Law Med Ethics; 2005; 33(2):248-63. PubMed ID: 16083084 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. [Expert assessment of professional errors in stomatology]. Popova TG Sud Med Ekspert; 2008; 51(3):35-7. PubMed ID: 18589675 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]