152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26605124)
21. Identifying contributors of DNA mixtures by means of quantitative information of STR typing.
Tvedebrink T; Eriksen PS; Mogensen HS; Morling N
J Comput Biol; 2012 Jul; 19(7):887-902. PubMed ID: 21210742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. The Development and Application of Random Match Probabilities to Firearm and Toolmark Identification.
Murdock JE; Petraco NDK; Thornton JI; Neel MT; Weller TJ; Thompson RM; Hamby JE; Collins ER
J Forensic Sci; 2017 May; 62(3):619-625. PubMed ID: 28449257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. A novel set of DIP-STR markers for improved analysis of challenging DNA mixtures.
Oldoni F; Castella V; Hall D
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2015 Nov; 19():156-164. PubMed ID: 26232274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. GHEP-ISFG collaborative exercise on mixture profiles (GHEP-MIX06). Reporting conclusions: Results and evaluation.
Barrio PA; Crespillo M; Luque JA; Aler M; Baeza-Richer C; Baldassarri L; Carnevali E; Coufalova P; Flores I; García O; García MA; González R; Hernández A; Inglés V; Luque GM; Mosquera-Miguel A; Pedrosa S; Pontes ML; Porto MJ; Posada Y; Ramella MI; Ribeiro T; Riego E; Sala A; Saragoni VG; Serrano A; Vannelli S
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Jul; 35():156-163. PubMed ID: 29783171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Fighting trafficking of falsified and substandard medicinal products in Russia.
Fayzrakhmanov NF
Int J Risk Saf Med; 2015; 27 Suppl 1():S37-40. PubMed ID: 26639702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. [DNA Typing for Individual Identification].
Kitamura M
Yakugaku Zasshi; 2019; 139(5):725-730. PubMed ID: 31061341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. Variation in assessments of suitability and number of contributors for DNA mixtures.
Hicklin RA; Richetelli N; Emerick BL; Bever RA; Davoren JM
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2023 Jul; 65():102892. PubMed ID: 37267812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Mixture deconvolution by massively parallel sequencing of microhaplotypes.
Bennett L; Oldoni F; Long K; Cisana S; Madella K; Wootton S; Chang J; Hasegawa R; Lagacé R; Kidd KK; Podini D
Int J Legal Med; 2019 May; 133(3):719-729. PubMed ID: 30758713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Evaluating Mixture Solution™- rapid and non-MCMC probabilistic mixture analysis.
Lucassen A; Ehlers K; Grobler PJ; Brenner CH
Int J Legal Med; 2021 Nov; 135(6):2275-2284. PubMed ID: 34599363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Interactions with youth justice and associated costs for young people with speech, language and communication needs.
Cronin P; Addo R
Int J Lang Commun Disord; 2021 Jul; 56(4):797-811. PubMed ID: 34042241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Exclusion probabilities and likelihood ratios with applications to mixtures.
Slooten KJ; Egeland T
Int J Legal Med; 2016 Jan; 130(1):39-57. PubMed ID: 26160753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Defendant stereotypicality moderates the effect of confession evidence on judgments of guilt.
Smalarz L; Madon S; Turosak A
Law Hum Behav; 2018 Aug; 42(4):355-368. PubMed ID: 29939062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Development and validation of open-source software for DNA mixture interpretation based on a quantitative continuous model.
Manabe S; Morimoto C; Hamano Y; Fujimoto S; Tamaki K
PLoS One; 2017; 12(11):e0188183. PubMed ID: 29149210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Review: domestic animal forensic genetics - biological evidence, genetic markers, analytical approaches and challenges.
Kanthaswamy S
Anim Genet; 2015 Oct; 46(5):473-84. PubMed ID: 26364867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Graph Algorithms for Mixture Interpretation.
Crysup B; Woerner AE; King JL; Budowle B
Genes (Basel); 2021 Jan; 12(2):. PubMed ID: 33514030
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. 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]
38. The interpretation of forensic conclusions by criminal justice professionals: The same evidence interpreted differently.
van Straalen EK; de Poot CJ; Malsch M; Elffers H
Forensic Sci Int; 2020 Aug; 313():110331. PubMed ID: 32502741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Using big data from probabilistic genotyping to solve crime.
Taylor D; Abarno D
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2022 Mar; 57():102631. PubMed ID: 34861631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Statistical issues in DNA evidence.
Brookfield JF
Electrophoresis; 1995 Sep; 16(9):1665-9. PubMed ID: 8582353
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
