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 *

161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31404811)

  • 1. Perceptions and estimates of error rates in forensic science: A survey of forensic analysts.
    Murrie DC; Gardner BO; Kelley S; Dror IE
    Forensic Sci Int; 2019 Sep; 302():109887. PubMed ID: 31404811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Handwriting Evidence in Federal Courts - From Frye to Kumho.
    Zlotnick J; Lin JR
    Forensic Sci Rev; 2001 Jul; 13(2):87-99. PubMed ID: 26256304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Forensic science evidence: Naive estimates of false positive error rates and reliability.
    Martire KA; Ballantyne KN; Bali A; Edmond G; Kemp RI; Found B
    Forensic Sci Int; 2019 Sep; 302():109877. PubMed ID: 31415947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. What do forensic analysts consider relevant to their decision making?
    Gardner BO; Kelley S; Murrie DC; Dror IE
    Sci Justice; 2019 Sep; 59(5):516-523. PubMed ID: 31472796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Beliefs about error rates and human judgment in forensic science.
    Ribeiro G; Tangen JM; McKimmie BM
    Forensic Sci Int; 2019 Apr; 297():138-147. PubMed ID: 30802644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Error and its meaning in forensic science.
    Christensen AM; Crowder CM; Ousley SD; Houck MM
    J Forensic Sci; 2014 Jan; 59(1):123-6. PubMed ID: 24111751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The over-citation of Daubert in forensic anthropology.
    Lesciotto KM; Christensen AM
    J Forensic Sci; 2024 Jan; 69(1):9-17. PubMed ID: 37855082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Forensic identification science evidence since Daubert: Part I--A quantitative analysis of the exclusion of forensic identification science evidence.
    Page M; Taylor J; Blenkin M
    J Forensic Sci; 2011 Sep; 56(5):1180-4. PubMed ID: 21884119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Kumho, Daubert, and the nature of scientific inquiry: implications for forensic anthropology.
    Grivas CR; Komar DA
    J Forensic Sci; 2008 Jul; 53(4):771-6. PubMed ID: 18489550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Forensic identification science evidence since Daubert: Part II--judicial reasoning in decisions to exclude forensic identification evidence on grounds of reliability.
    Page M; Taylor J; Blenkin M
    J Forensic Sci; 2011 Jul; 56(4):913-7. PubMed ID: 21729081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Quantitative EEG and the Frye and Daubert standards of admissibility.
    Thatcher RW; Biver CJ; North DM
    Clin Electroencephalogr; 2003 Apr; 34(2):39-53. PubMed ID: 12784902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Forensic Gait Analysis and Recognition: Standards of Evidence Admissibility.
    Macoveciuc I; Rando CJ; Borrion H
    J Forensic Sci; 2019 Sep; 64(5):1294-1303. PubMed ID: 30791120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The Foundations of the Comparison Forensic Sciences: Report of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.
    Cordner S; Ranson D; Bassed R
    J Law Med; 2016; 24(2):297-302. PubMed ID: 30137704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The impact of Daubert: implications for testimony and research in forensic anthropology (and the use of frontal sinuses in personal identification).
    Christensen AM
    J Forensic Sci; 2004 May; 49(3):427-30. PubMed ID: 15171154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. What do the experts know? Calibration, precision, and the wisdom of crowds among forensic handwriting experts.
    Martire KA; Growns B; Navarro DJ
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2018 Dec; 25(6):2346-2355. PubMed ID: 29667124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Asking the gatekeepers: a national survey of judges on judging expert evidence in a post-Daubert world.
    Gatowski SI; Dobbin SA; Richardson JT; Ginsburg GP; Merlino ML; Dahir V
    Law Hum Behav; 2001 Oct; 25(5):433-58. PubMed ID: 11688367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Human Factors Effecting Forensic Decision Making: Workplace Stress and Well-being.
    Jeanguenat AM; Dror IE
    J Forensic Sci; 2018 Jan; 63(1):258-261. PubMed ID: 28464220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Meeting a Forensic Podiatry Admissibility Challenge: A Daubert Case Study.
    Nirenberg M
    J Forensic Sci; 2016 May; 61(3):833-841. PubMed ID: 27122428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The impact of Daubert on the admissibility of forensic anthropology expert testimony.
    Lesciotto KM
    J Forensic Sci; 2015 May; 60(3):549-55. PubMed ID: 25716577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cognitive bias research in forensic science: A systematic review.
    Cooper GS; Meterko V
    Forensic Sci Int; 2019 Apr; 297():35-46. PubMed ID: 30769302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.