152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28018424)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. A Logical Framework for Forensic DNA Interpretation.
Hicks T; Buckleton J; Castella V; Evett I; Jackson G
Genes (Basel); 2022 May; 13(6):. PubMed ID: 35741719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Stabbing simulations and DNA transfer.
Samie L; Hicks T; Castella V; Taroni F
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 May; 22():73-80. PubMed ID: 26875110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. American forensic DNA practitioners' opinion on activity level evaluative reporting.
Yang YJ; Prinz M; McKiernan H; Oldoni F
J Forensic Sci; 2022 Jul; 67(4):1357-1369. PubMed ID: 35568965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Global survey on evaluative reporting on DNA evidence with regard to activity-level propositions.
Prinz M; Pirtle D; Oldoni F
J Forensic Sci; 2024 May; 69(3):798-813. PubMed ID: 38351537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Interpreting small quantities of DNA: the hierarchy of propositions and the use of Bayesian networks.
Evett IW; Gill PD; Jackson G; Whitaker J; Champod C
J Forensic Sci; 2002 May; 47(3):520-30. PubMed ID: 12051330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Whose DNA is this? How relevant a question? (a note for forensic scientists).
Taroni F; Biedermann A; Vuille J; Morling N
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2013 Jul; 7(4):467-70. PubMed ID: 23623242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Reporting on forensic biology findings given activity level issues in the Netherlands.
Kokshoorn B; Luijsterburg M
Forensic Sci Int; 2023 Feb; 343():111545. PubMed ID: 36634430
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Activity level DNA evidence evaluation: On propositions addressing the actor or the activity.
Kokshoorn B; Blankers BJ; de Zoete J; Berger CEH
Forensic Sci Int; 2017 Sep; 278():115-124. PubMed ID: 28715673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The use of Bayesian Networks and simulation methods to identify the variables impacting the value of evidence assessed under activity level propositions in stabbing cases.
Samie L; Champod C; Taylor D; Taroni F
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Sep; 48():102334. PubMed ID: 32563838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. On DNA transfer: The lack and difficulty of systematic research and how to do it better.
Gosch A; Courts C
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 May; 40():24-36. PubMed ID: 30731249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
