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 *

158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25669827)

  • 21. Criminal DNA data banks: revolution for law enforcement or threat to individual privacy?
    Yee YH
    Am J Crim Law; 1995; 22(2):461-90. PubMed ID: 11655161
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Canada's DNA databank: public safety and private costs.
    Parfett J
    Manit Law J; 2002; 29(1):33-79. PubMed ID: 16514758
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Attitudes regarding the national forensic DNA database: Survey data from the general public, prison inmates and prosecutors' offices in the Republic of Serbia.
    Teodorović S; Mijović D; Radovanović Nenadić U; Savić M
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2017 May; 28():44-51. PubMed ID: 28171783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. DNA databases: when fear goes too far.
    Peterson RS
    Am Crim Law Rev; 2000; 37(3):1219-38. PubMed ID: 11958233
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Biosamples, genomics, and human rights: context and content of Iceland's Biobanks Act.
    Winickoff DE
    J Biolaw Bus; 2001; 4(2):11-7. PubMed ID: 12530389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Should police have access to genetic genealogy databases? Capturing the Golden State Killer and other criminals using a controversial new forensic technique.
    Guerrini CJ; Robinson JO; Petersen D; McGuire AL
    PLoS Biol; 2018 Oct; 16(10):e2006906. PubMed ID: 30278047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. DNA profiles, computer searches, and the Fourth Amendment.
    Kimel CW
    Duke Law J; 2013; 62(4):933-73. PubMed ID: 23461001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Assessing Fourth Amendment challenges to DNA extraction statutes after Samson v. California.
    Nerko CJ
    Fordham Law Rev; 2008 Nov; 77(2):917-49. PubMed ID: 19353834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Whose DNA is it anyway? European court, junk DNA, and the problem with prediction.
    Sarkar SP; Adshead G
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2010; 38(2):247-50. PubMed ID: 20542946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. [From genetic privacy to the right to genetic data protection. Basic protection of genetic data in Spanish law (regarding SSTC290/2000 and 292/2000, of November 30) (II)]].
    Seoane Rodríguez JA
    Rev Derecho Genoma Hum; 2002; (17):135-75. PubMed ID: 12703113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. A database of the innocent?
    Bingham R
    Splice Life; 2001; 7(2-3):8-9. PubMed ID: 12564461
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. [; IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RIGHT TO PROTECT HEALTH ON THE MATERIALS OF THE PRACTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS].
    Yukhno O; Yemelianov V; Pavlykivskyi V; Kalashnyk O; Sivash O
    Georgian Med News; 2020; (304-305):189-194. PubMed ID: 32965273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Dangerous excursions: the case against expanding forensic DNA databases to innocent persons.
    Simoncelli T
    J Law Med Ethics; 2006; 34(2):390-7. PubMed ID: 16789961
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Legal aspects of cancer deseases prophylactics: patients rights context.
    Tatsiy V; Gutorova N; Pashkov V
    Wiad Lek; 2017; 70(6 pt 1):1108-1113. PubMed ID: 29478987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Retention of offender DNA samples necessary to ensure and monitor quality of forensic DNA efforts: appropriate safeguards exist to protect the DNA samples from misuse.
    Herkenham MD
    J Law Med Ethics; 2006; 34(2):380-4. PubMed ID: 16789959
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Property rights in genetic information.
    Spinello RA
    Ethics Inf Technol; 2004; 6(1):29-42. PubMed ID: 16969959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Forensic genealogy and the power of defaults.
    Ram N; Roberts JL
    Nat Biotechnol; 2019 Jul; 37(7):707-708. PubMed ID: 31189937
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Genetic privacy: constitutional considerations in forensic DNA testing.
    Burk DL; Hess JA
    Geoge Mason Univ Civ Rights Law J; 1994; 5(1):1-53. PubMed ID: 11657430
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The UK National DNA Database: Implementation of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
    Amankwaa AO; McCartney C
    Forensic Sci Int; 2018 Mar; 284():117-128. PubMed ID: 29367171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Law and policy oversight of familial searches in recreational genealogy databases.
    Murphy E
    Forensic Sci Int; 2018 Nov; 292():e5-e9. PubMed ID: 30287164
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.