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 *

182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29727813)

  • 21. Interpreting a major component from a mixed DNA profile with an unknown number of minor contributors.
    Bille T; Weitz S; Buckleton JS; Bright JA
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 May; 40():150-159. PubMed ID: 30844683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Analysis of mixed DNA profiles from the RapidHIT™ ID platform using probabilistic genotyping software STRmix™.
    Ward D; Henry J; Taylor D
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2022 May; 58():102664. PubMed ID: 35091215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Using the Nondonor Distribution to Improve Communication and Inform Decision Making for Low LRs from Minor Contributors in Mixed DNA Profiles.
    Schuerman C; Kalafut T; Buchanan C; Sutton J; Bright JA
    J Forensic Sci; 2020 Jul; 65(4):1072-1084. PubMed ID: 32134501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The interpretation of mixed DNA profiles from a mother, father, and child trio.
    Lin MH; Bright JA; Pugh SN; Buckleton JS
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Jan; 44():102175. PubMed ID: 31644964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. An assessment of the performance of the probabilistic genotyping software EuroForMix: Trends in likelihood ratios and analysis of Type I & II errors.
    Benschop CCG; Nijveld A; Duijs FE; Sijen T
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 Sep; 42():31-38. PubMed ID: 31212207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Development and validation of Kongoh ver. 3.0.1: Open-source software for DNA mixture interpretation in the GlobalFiler system based on a quantitative continuous model.
    Manabe S; Fukagawa T; Fujii K; Mizuno N; Sekiguchi K; Akane A; Tamaki K
    Leg Med (Tokyo); 2022 Feb; 54():101972. PubMed ID: 34629243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Multi-laboratory validation of DNAxs including the statistical library DNAStatistX.
    Benschop CCG; Hoogenboom J; Bargeman F; Hovers P; Slagter M; van der Linden J; Parag R; Kruise D; Drobnic K; Klucevsek G; Parson W; Berger B; Laurent FX; Faivre M; Ulus A; Schneider P; Bogus M; Kneppers ALJ; Sijen T
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Nov; 49():102390. PubMed ID: 32937255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. NIST interlaboratory studies involving DNA mixtures (MIX13): A modern analysis.
    Buckleton JS; Bright JA; Cheng K; Budowle B; Coble MD
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Nov; 37():172-179. PubMed ID: 30176439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Interpretation of complex DNA profiles using empirical models and a method to measure their robustness.
    Gill P; Curran J; Neumann C; Kirkham A; Clayton T; Whitaker J; Lambert J
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2008 Mar; 2(2):91-103. PubMed ID: 19083804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the PROVEDIt dataset.
    Riman S; Iyer H; Vallone PM
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(9):e0256714. PubMed ID: 34534241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Implementation and validation of an improved allele specific stutter filtering method for electropherogram interpretation.
    Kalafut T; Schuerman C; Sutton J; Faris T; Armogida L; Bright JA; Buckleton J; Taylor D
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Jul; 35():50-56. PubMed ID: 29660688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Four model variants within a continuous forensic DNA mixture interpretation framework: Effects on evidential inference and reporting.
    Swaminathan H; Qureshi MO; Grgicak CM; Duffy K; Lun DS
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(11):e0207599. PubMed ID: 30458020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. CEESIt: A computational tool for the interpretation of STR mixtures.
    Swaminathan H; Garg A; Grgicak CM; Medard M; Lun DS
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 May; 22():149-160. PubMed ID: 26946255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Distinguishing between donors and their relatives in complex DNA mixtures with binary models.
    Slooten K
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 Mar; 21():95-109. PubMed ID: 26745184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Likelihood Ratio Calculation Using LRmix Studio.
    Foley MM
    Methods Mol Biol; 2023; 2685():307-328. PubMed ID: 37439990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Correcting forensic DNA errors.
    Hampikian G
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 Jul; 41():32-33. PubMed ID: 30947116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Uncertainty in probabilistic genotyping of low template DNA: A case study comparing STRMix™ and TrueAllele™.
    Thompson WC
    J Forensic Sci; 2023 May; 68(3):1049-1063. PubMed ID: 36847295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. An assessment of the information content of likelihood ratios derived from complex mixtures.
    Marsden CD; Rudin N; Inman K; Lohmueller KE
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 May; 22():64-72. PubMed ID: 26851613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. GHEP-ISFG collaborative exercise on mixture profiles (GHEP-MIX06). Reporting conclusions: Results and evaluation.
    Barrio PA; Crespillo M; Luque JA; Aler M; Baeza-Richer C; Baldassarri L; Carnevali E; Coufalova P; Flores I; García O; García MA; González R; Hernández A; Inglés V; Luque GM; Mosquera-Miguel A; Pedrosa S; Pontes ML; Porto MJ; Posada Y; Ramella MI; Ribeiro T; Riego E; Sala A; Saragoni VG; Serrano A; Vannelli S
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Jul; 35():156-163. PubMed ID: 29783171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. STRmix
    Noël S; Noël J; Granger D; Lefebvre JF; Séguin D
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 Jul; 41():24-31. PubMed ID: 30947115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.