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 *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28364883)

  • 1. Good science, bad science, and junk science.
    Chauca FB
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2017 Apr; 151(4):637-638. PubMed ID: 28364883
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The medical expert, junk reasoning, and junk science in personal injury litigation.
    Berry H
    Tort Trial Insur Pract Law J; 2005; 40(4):1101-43. PubMed ID: 16397961
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Sex offender testimony: junk science or unethical testimony?
    Zonana H
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2000; 28(4):386-8. PubMed ID: 11196247
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. False claims in tobacco litigation junk science article.
    Viscusi WK
    Am J Public Health; 2006 May; 96(5):767; author reply 767. PubMed ID: 16571684
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effectiveness of opposing expert witnesses for educating jurors about unreliable expert evidence.
    Levett LM; Kovera MB
    Law Hum Behav; 2008 Aug; 32(4):363-74. PubMed ID: 17940854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Court ruling on 'junk science' gives judges more say about what expert witness testimony to allow.
    Marwick C
    JAMA; 1993 Jul; 270(4):423. PubMed ID: 8320770
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Attorney abuses of Daubert hearings: junk science, junk law, or just plain obstruction?
    Gutheil TG; Bursztajn HJ
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2005; 33(2):150-2. PubMed ID: 15985655
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Expert witness testimony: rules of engagement.
    Satiani B
    Vasc Endovascular Surg; 2006; 40(3):223-7. PubMed ID: 16703210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. "Junk science" and the legal system.
    McFadden J
    Pa Dent J (Harrisb); 1998; 65(3):5. PubMed ID: 14621505
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Marketplace. AMA sets campaign to punish doctors who base testimony on 'junk science'.
    Moskowitz DB
    Med Health; 1998 Nov; 52(46):suppl 1-2. PubMed ID: 10187178
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Clearing away the junk: court-appointed experts, scientifically marginal evidence, and the silicone gel breast implant litigation.
    Goss PJ; Worthington DL; Stallard MJ; Price JM
    Food Drug Law J; 2001; 56(2):227-40. PubMed ID: 12022195
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Junk science v. American competitiveness.
    Szycher M
    J Biomater Appl; 1993 Jul; 8(1):3-19. PubMed ID: 8345448
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The verdict on 'junk science'.
    Wood TP
    CAP Today; 1998 Feb; 12(2):9. PubMed ID: 10177237
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. How tobacco-friendly science escapes scrutiny in the courtroom.
    Friedman LC; Daynard RA; Banthin CN
    Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S16-20. PubMed ID: 16030332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Junk science--is peer review the answer?
    Brumback RA
    J Child Neurol; 1995 May; 10(3):175-6. PubMed ID: 7642885
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. GMC clears GP accused of giving court "junk science" on MMR vaccine.
    Dyer O
    BMJ; 2007 Sep; 335(7617):416-7. PubMed ID: 17762017
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Neurolitigation: a perspective on the elements of expert testimony for extending the Daubert challenge.
    Klee CH; Friedman HJ
    NeuroRehabilitation; 2001; 16(2):79-85. PubMed ID: 11568465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Is "junk science" finally on the way out?
    Crane M
    Med Econ; 1996 Apr; 73(8):59-61, 65-6. PubMed ID: 10157438
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Educating Jurors about Forensic Evidence: Using an Expert Witness and Judicial Instructions to Mitigate the Impact of Invalid Forensic Science Testimony.
    Eastwood J; Caldwell J
    J Forensic Sci; 2015 Nov; 60(6):1523-8. PubMed ID: 26234166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The four most pernicious myths in asbestos litigation: Part II: safe thresholds for exposure and Tyndall lighting as junk science.
    Meisenkothen C
    New Solut; 2014; 24(1):27-55. PubMed ID: 25053605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.