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 *

146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29684944)

  • 1. Comparing Categorical and Probabilistic Fingerprint Evidence.
    Garrett B; Mitchell G; Scurich N
    J Forensic Sci; 2018 Nov; 63(6):1712-1717. PubMed ID: 29684944
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The impact of proficiency testing information and error aversions on the weight given to fingerprint evidence.
    Mitchell G; Garrett BL
    Behav Sci Law; 2019 Mar; 37(2):195-210. PubMed ID: 30883891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Human matching performance of genuine crime scene latent fingerprints.
    Thompson MB; Tangen JM; McCarthy DJ
    Law Hum Behav; 2014 Feb; 38(1):84-93. PubMed ID: 23876092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Preliminary investigation of the ability of fingerprint examiners in detection of sib-sib relationships based upon finger and palm prints similarities.
    Hefetz I; Pasternak Z; Liptz Y; Bet-Yosef M
    Forensic Sci Int; 2022 Aug; 337():111381. PubMed ID: 35839683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The nature of expertise in fingerprint matching: experts can do a lot with a little.
    Thompson MB; Tangen JM
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(12):e114759. PubMed ID: 25517509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Quantitative assessment of similarity between randomly acquired characteristics on high quality exemplars and crime scene impressions via analysis of feature size and shape.
    Richetelli N; Nobel M; Bodziak WJ; Speir JA
    Forensic Sci Int; 2017 Jan; 270():211-222. PubMed ID: 27838107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Juror appraisals of forensic evidence: Effects of blind proficiency and cross-examination.
    Crozier WE; Kukucka J; Garrett BL
    Forensic Sci Int; 2020 Oct; 315():110433. PubMed ID: 32763747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Error Rates, Likelihood Ratios, and Jury Evaluation of Forensic Evidence.
    Garrett BL; Crozier WE; Grady R
    J Forensic Sci; 2020 Jul; 65(4):1199-1209. PubMed ID: 32320075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Calibrating the perceived strength of evidence of forensic testimony statements.
    Busey T; Klutzke M
    Sci Justice; 2023 Jan; 63(1):38-53. PubMed ID: 36631180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The testimony of forensic identification science: what expert witnesses say and what factfinders hear.
    McQuiston-Surrett D; Saks MJ
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Oct; 33(5):436-53. PubMed ID: 19259800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Use of AFIS for linking scenes of crime.
    Hefetz I; Liptz Y; Vaturi S; Attias D
    Forensic Sci Int; 2016 May; 262():e25-7. PubMed ID: 26996923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The verdict on jury trials for juveniles: the effects of defendant's age on trial outcomes.
    Warling D; Peterson-Badali M
    Behav Sci Law; 2003; 21(1):63-82. PubMed ID: 12579618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cognitive and contextual influences in determination of latent fingerprint suitability for identification judgments.
    Fraser-Mackenzie PA; Dror IE; Wertheim K
    Sci Justice; 2013 Jun; 53(2):144-53. PubMed ID: 23601721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Operational benefits and challenges of the use of fingerprint statistical models: a field study.
    Neumann C; Mateos-Garcia I; Langenburg G; Kostroski J; Skerrett JE; Koolen M
    Forensic Sci Int; 2011 Oct; 212(1-3):32-46. PubMed ID: 21640531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Validating strength-of-support conclusion scales for fingerprint, footwear, and toolmark impressions.
    Busey T; Klutzke M; Nuzzi A; Vanderkolk J
    J Forensic Sci; 2022 May; 67(3):936-954. PubMed ID: 35322424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Ridge Width Correlations between Inked Prints and Powdered Latent Fingerprints.
    De Alcaraz-Fossoul J; Barrot-Feixat C; Zapico SC; Mancenido M; Broatch J; Roberts KA; Carreras-Marin C; Tasker J
    J Forensic Sci; 2018 Jul; 63(4):1085-1091. PubMed ID: 28973828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Expertise in fingerprint identification.
    Thompson MB; Tangen JM; McCarthy DJ
    J Forensic Sci; 2013 Nov; 58(6):1519-30. PubMed ID: 23786258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effects of cognitive bias, examiner expertise, and stimulus material on forensic evidence analysis.
    Pena MM; Stoiloff S; Sparacino M; Schreiber Compo N
    J Forensic Sci; 2024 Jun; ():. PubMed ID: 38922874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Development of latent fingerprints on non-porous surfaces recovered from fresh and sea water.
    Madkour S; Abeer Sheta ; El Dine FB; Elwakeel Y; AbdAllah N
    Egypt J Forensic Sci; 2017; 7(1):3. PubMed ID: 28775901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The perfect match: Do criminal stereotypes bias forensic evidence analysis?
    Smalarz L; Madon S; Yang Y; Guyll M; Buck S
    Law Hum Behav; 2016 Aug; 40(4):420-9. PubMed ID: 27149288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.