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 *

244 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31693180)

  • 1. Assessing Cognitive Bias in Forensic Decisions: A Review and Outlook.
    Curley LJ; Munro J; Lages M; MacLean R; Murray J
    J Forensic Sci; 2020 Mar; 65(2):354-360. PubMed ID: 31693180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A risk-based approach to cognitive bias in forensic science.
    Camilleri A; Abarno D; Bird C; Coxon A; Mitchell N; Redman K; Sly N; Wills S; Silenieks E; Simpson E; Lindsay H
    Sci Justice; 2019 Sep; 59(5):533-543. PubMed ID: 31472798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Contextual bias on decision-making in forensic toxicology: First survey from China.
    He N; Wang L; Hao H
    Forensic Sci Int; 2022 Apr; 333():111232. PubMed ID: 35176676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Forensic Confirmation Bias: Do Jurors Discount Examiners Who Were Exposed to Task-Irrelevant Information?*
    Kukucka J; Hiley A; Kassin SM
    J Forensic Sci; 2020 Nov; 65(6):1978-1990. PubMed ID: 32790911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. The use of contextual information in forensic toxicology: An international survey of toxicologists' experiences.
    Hamnett HJ; Jack RE
    Sci Justice; 2019 Jul; 59(4):380-389. PubMed ID: 31256809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. How Cross-Examination on Subjectivity and Bias Affects Jurors' Evaluations of Forensic Science Evidence.
    Thompson WC; Scurich N
    J Forensic Sci; 2019 Sep; 64(5):1379-1388. PubMed ID: 30791101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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 Sep; 69(5):1740-1757. PubMed ID: 38922874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Naturalistic decision making in forensic science: toward a better understanding of decision making by forensic team leaders.
    Helsloot I; Groenendaal J
    J Forensic Sci; 2011 Jul; 56(4):890-7. PubMed ID: 21361940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Do evidence submission forms expose latent print examiners to task-irrelevant information?
    Gardner BO; Kelley S; Murrie DC; Blaisdell KN
    Forensic Sci Int; 2019 Apr; 297():236-242. PubMed ID: 30875663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Blinding or information control in diagnosis: could it reduce errors in clinical decision-making?
    Lockhart JJ; Satya-Murti S
    Diagnosis (Berl); 2018 Nov; 5(4):179-189. PubMed ID: 30231010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Contextual bias by Forensic Document Examination trainees: An empirical study from China.
    He N; Hao H
    Sci Justice; 2024 Jul; 64(4):360-366. PubMed ID: 39025561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The biasing impact of irrelevant contextual information on forensic odontology radiograph matching decisions.
    Chiam SL; Dror IE; Huber CD; Higgins D
    Forensic Sci Int; 2021 Oct; 327():110997. PubMed ID: 34536753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Diagnosing Crime and Diagnosing Disease-II: Visual Pattern Perception and Diagnostic Accuracy.
    Satya-Murti S; Lockhart JJ
    J Forensic Sci; 2018 Sep; 63(5):1429-1434. PubMed ID: 29341129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Quality of Laypersons' Assessment of Forensically Relevant Stimuli.
    Sneyd D; Schreiber Compo N; Rivard J; Pena M; Stoiloff S; Hernandez G
    J Forensic Sci; 2020 Sep; 65(5):1507-1516. PubMed ID: 32628285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Biasability and reliability of expert forensic document examiners.
    Dror IE; Scherr KC; Mohammed LA; MacLean CL; Cunningham L
    Forensic Sci Int; 2021 Jan; 318():110610. PubMed ID: 33358191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A global survey of the attitudes and perspectives of cognitive bias in forensic anthropology.
    Leung KN; Nakhaeizadeh S; Morgan RM
    Sci Justice; 2024 Jul; 64(4):347-359. PubMed ID: 39025560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Diagnosing Crime and Diagnosing Disease: Bias Reduction Strategies in the Forensic and Clinical Sciences.
    Lockhart JJ; Satya-Murti S
    J Forensic Sci; 2017 Nov; 62(6):1534-1541. PubMed ID: 28230894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions.
    Dror I; Melinek J; Arden JL; Kukucka J; Hawkins S; Carter J; Atherton DS
    J Forensic Sci; 2021 Sep; 66(5):1751-1757. PubMed ID: 33608908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.