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 *

244 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26654089)

  • 1. The importance of distinguishing information from evidence/observations when formulating propositions.
    Hicks T; Biedermann A; de Koeijer JA; Taroni F; Champod C; Evett IW
    Sci Justice; 2015 Dec; 55(6):520-5. PubMed ID: 26654089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. DNA commission of the International society for forensic genetics: Assessing the value of forensic biological evidence - Guidelines highlighting the importance of propositions: Part I: evaluation of DNA profiling comparisons given (sub-) source propositions.
    Gill P; Hicks T; Butler JM; Connolly E; Gusmão L; Kokshoorn B; Morling N; van Oorschot RAH; Parson W; Prinz M; Schneider PM; Sijen T; Taylor D
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Sep; 36():189-202. PubMed ID: 30041098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluating forensic biology results given source level propositions.
    Taylor D; Abarno D; Hicks T; Champod C
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 Mar; 21():54-67. PubMed ID: 26720813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. DNA commission of the International society for forensic genetics: Assessing the value of forensic biological evidence - Guidelines highlighting the importance of propositions. Part II: Evaluation of biological traces considering activity level propositions.
    Gill P; Hicks T; Butler JM; Connolly E; Gusmão L; Kokshoorn B; Morling N; van Oorschot RAH; Parson W; Prinz M; Schneider PM; Sijen T; Taylor D
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Jan; 44():102186. PubMed ID: 31677444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of Forensic DNA Traces When Propositions of Interest Relate to Activities: Analysis and Discussion of Recurrent Concerns.
    Biedermann A; Champod C; Jackson G; Gill P; Taylor D; Butler J; Morling N; Hicks T; Vuille J; Taroni F
    Front Genet; 2016; 7():215. PubMed ID: 28018424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Quantitative assessment of evidential weight for a fingerprint comparison. Part II: a generalisation to take account of the general pattern.
    Neumann C; Evett IW; Skerrett JE; Mateos-Garcia I
    Forensic Sci Int; 2012 Jan; 214(1-3):195-9. PubMed ID: 21885220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Discussion on how to implement a verbal scale in a forensic laboratory: Benefits, pitfalls and suggestions to avoid misunderstandings.
    Marquis R; Biedermann A; Cadola L; Champod C; Gueissaz L; Massonnet G; Mazzella WD; Taroni F; Hicks T
    Sci Justice; 2016 Sep; 56(5):364-370. PubMed ID: 27702452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Refining the relevant population in forensic voice comparison - A response to Hicks et alii (2015) The importance of distinguishing information from evidence/observations when formulating propositions.
    Morrison GS; Enzinger E; Zhang C
    Sci Justice; 2016 Dec; 56(6):492-497. PubMed ID: 27914557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A Practical Guide for the Formulation of Propositions in the Bayesian Approach to DNA Evidence Interpretation in an Adversarial Environment.
    Gittelson S; Kalafut T; Myers S; Taylor D; Hicks T; Taroni F; Evett IW; Bright JA; Buckleton J
    J Forensic Sci; 2016 Jan; 61(1):186-95. PubMed ID: 26248867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. When evaluating DNA evidence within a likelihood ratio framework, should the propositions be exhaustive?
    Buckleton J; Taylor D; Bright JA; Hicks T; Curran J
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2021 Jan; 50():102406. PubMed ID: 33142191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Helping formulate propositions in forensic DNA analysis.
    Buckleton J; Bright JA; Taylor D; Evett I; Hicks T; Jackson G; Curran JM
    Sci Justice; 2014 Jul; 54(4):258-61. PubMed ID: 25002042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Analysing and exemplifying forensic conclusion criteria in terms of Bayesian decision theory.
    Biedermann A; Bozza S; Taroni F
    Sci Justice; 2018 Mar; 58(2):159-165. PubMed ID: 29526268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Quantitative assessment of evidential weight for a fingerprint comparison I. Generalisation to the comparison of a mark with set of ten prints from a suspect.
    Neumann C; Evett IW; Skerrett JE; Mateos-Garcia I
    Forensic Sci Int; 2011 Apr; 207(1-3):101-5. PubMed ID: 20965673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A template for constructing Bayesian networks in forensic biology cases when considering activity level propositions.
    Taylor D; Biedermann A; Hicks T; Champod C
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Mar; 33():136-146. PubMed ID: 29275089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparing multiple POI to DNA mixtures.
    Hicks T; Kerr Z; Pugh S; Bright JA; Curran J; Taylor D; Buckleton J
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2021 May; 52():102481. PubMed ID: 33607394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Questions, propositions and assessing different levels of evidence: Forensic voice comparison in practice.
    Hughes V; Rhodes R
    Sci Justice; 2018 Jul; 58(4):250-257. PubMed ID: 29895456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Digitally processing an image of a shoe impression in blood.
    Daniel O; Levi A; Chaikovsky A; Cohen Y
    J Forensic Sci; 2021 May; 66(3):1143-1147. PubMed ID: 33332705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of forensic genetics findings given activity level propositions: A review.
    Taylor D; Kokshoorn B; Biedermann A
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Sep; 36():34-49. PubMed ID: 29929059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Addressing uncertain assumptions in DNA evidence evaluation.
    Kruijver M; Kelly H; Taylor D; Buckleton J
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2023 Sep; 66():102913. PubMed ID: 37453205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Structuring cases into propositions, assumptions, and undisputed case information.
    Taylor D; Kokshoorn B; Hicks T
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Jan; 44():102199. PubMed ID: 31756630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.