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.
3. The law is not equipped to consider scientific dispute. Watkins SJ BMJ; 2016 Mar; 352():i1768. PubMed ID: 27032412 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Forensic science in the trial of Sally Clark. Montgomery C Med Sci Law; 2004 Jul; 44(3):185-8. PubMed ID: 15296238 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Communicating forensic scientific expertise: An analysis of expert reports and corresponding testimony in Tasmanian courts. Reid CA; Howes LM Sci Justice; 2020 Mar; 60(2):108-119. PubMed ID: 32111283 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Malpractice in radiation oncology: redefining the role of the medical expert: in regard to Kagan (Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;61:638-639). Wallner K; Elliott K; Merrick G; Herstein P; Rieke J Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2005 Jul; 62(4):1254-5; author reply 1255. PubMed ID: 15990032 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Standards for the formulation of evaluative forensic science expert opinion. Association of Forensic Science Providers Sci Justice; 2009 Sep; 49(3):161-4. PubMed ID: 19839414 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Formulation and communication of evaluative forensic science expert opinion-A GHEP-ISFG contribution to the establishment of standards. Amorim A; Crespillo M; Luque JA; Prieto L; Garcia O; Gusmão L; Aler M; Barrio PA; Saragoni VG; Pinto N Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 Nov; 25():210-213. PubMed ID: 27690358 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The legal framework for more robust forensic science evidence. Rt Hon. the Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci; 2015 Aug; 370(1674):. PubMed ID: 26101283 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. [The genesis, system, functions, and tendencies in the development of forensic expertise]. Rossinskaya ER Sud Med Ekspert; 2017; 60(5):4-7. PubMed ID: 28980545 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Label the limits of forensic science. Mejia R Nature; 2017 Apr; 544(7648):7. PubMed ID: 28383000 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Malpractice in radiation oncology: redefining the role of the medical expert. Kagan AR Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2005 Mar; 61(3):638-9. PubMed ID: 15708239 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Standards for the formulation of evaluative forensic science expert opinion Association of Forensic Science Providers. Willis S Sci Justice; 2010 Mar; 50(1):49. PubMed ID: 20408380 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Science in court: Courage of conviction. Gewin V Nature; 2015 Oct; 526(7573):463-5. PubMed ID: 26478935 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. [The reliable and plausible conclusions in the decisions of the forensic medical experts]. Kovalev AV; Shmarov LA; Ten'kov AA Sud Med Ekspert; 2016; 59(1):60-64. PubMed ID: 27030098 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Quality management systems and the admissibility of scientific evidence: the Costa Rican experience. Salas M; Gomez D Bull Narc; 2005; 57(1-2):259-69. PubMed ID: 21338026 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Bibliography of Polish literature on forensic medicine, criminology and related fields published in 2001]. Baran E Arch Med Sadowej Kryminol; 2002; 52(2):127-41. PubMed ID: 14733235 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Introduction to the work towards standardization in the field of forensic genetics at the first Lodz meeting of the Expert Team for Standards and Assessment in Forensic Genetics of the Polish Speaking Working Group of the International Society for Forensic Genetics (TSA-ISFG.PL). Jacewicz R Arch Med Sadowej Kryminol; 2018; 68(2):149-156. PubMed ID: 30509025 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Cell site analysis: Roles and interpretation. Tart M; Pope S; Baldwin D; Bird R Sci Justice; 2019 Sep; 59(5):558-564. PubMed ID: 31472801 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]