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 *

121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32979623)

  • 21. DNA identification by pedigree likelihood ratio accommodating population substructure and mutations.
    Ge J; Budowle B; Chakraborty R
    Investig Genet; 2010 Oct; 1(1):8. PubMed ID: 21092343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Models and implementation for relationship problems with dropout.
    Dørum G; Kling D; Baeza-Richer C; García-Magariños M; Sæbø S; Desmyter S; Egeland T
    Int J Legal Med; 2015 May; 129(3):411-23. PubMed ID: 25108449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. DNA Commission of the International Society for Forensic Genetics (ISFG): Guidelines on the use of X-STRs in kinship analysis.
    Tillmar AO; Kling D; Butler JM; Parson W; Prinz M; Schneider PM; Egeland T; Gusmão L
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2017 Jul; 29():269-275. PubMed ID: 28544956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Weight-of-evidence for DNA identification of missing persons and human remains using CODIS.
    Starinsky-Elbaz S; Ram T; Voskoboinik L; Pasternak Z
    Forensic Sci Med Pathol; 2020 Sep; 16(3):389-394. PubMed ID: 32394209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. On the use of dense SNP marker data for the identification of distant relative pairs.
    Sun M; Jobling MA; Taliun D; Pramstaller PP; Egeland T; Sheehan NA
    Theor Popul Biol; 2016 Feb; 107():14-25. PubMed ID: 26474828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. X-chromosome markers in kinship testing: a generalisation of the IBD approach identifying situations where their contribution is crucial.
    Pinto N; Gusmão L; Amorim A
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2011 Jan; 5(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 20457080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Large-scale identification of human bone remains via SNP microarray analysis with reference SNP database.
    Cho S; Kim MY; Lee JH; Lee HY; Lee SD
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Jul; 47():102293. PubMed ID: 32276230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Use of X-linked markers for forensic purposes.
    Szibor R; Krawczak M; Hering S; Edelmann J; Kuhlisch E; Krause D
    Int J Legal Med; 2003 Apr; 117(2):67-74. PubMed ID: 12690502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The likelihood ratio as a random variable for linked markers in kinship analysis.
    Egeland T; Slooten K
    Int J Legal Med; 2016 Nov; 130(6):1445-1456. PubMed ID: 27519910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Paternity exclusion power: comparative behaviour of autosomal and X-chromosomal markers in standard and deficient cases with inbreeding.
    Pinto N; Gusmão L; Egeland T; Amorim A
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2013 Feb; 7(2):290-5. PubMed ID: 23312390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. A multivariate statistical approach for the estimation of the ethnic origin of unknown genetic profiles in forensic genetics.
    Alladio E; Della Rocca C; Barni F; Dugoujon JM; Garofano P; Semino O; Berti A; Novelletto A; Vincenti M; Cruciani F
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Mar; 45():102209. PubMed ID: 31812099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The analogy between DNA kinship and DNA mixture evaluation, with applications for the interpretation of likelihood ratios produced by possibly imperfect models.
    Slooten K
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2021 May; 52():102449. PubMed ID: 33517022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Improving complex kinship analyses with additional STR loci.
    Carboni I; Iozzi S; Nutini AL; Torricelli F; Ricci U
    Electrophoresis; 2014 Nov; 35(21-22):3145-51. PubMed ID: 25113633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A general method to assess the utility of the X-chromosomal markers in kinship testing.
    Pinto N; Silva PV; Amorim A
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2012 Mar; 6(2):198-207. PubMed ID: 21592877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Strategies for pairwise searches in forensic kinship analysis.
    Brustad HK; Colucci M; Jobling MA; Sheehan NA; Egeland T
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2021 Sep; 54():102562. PubMed ID: 34274795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Large scale DNA identification: The ICMP experience.
    Parsons TJ; Huel RML; Bajunović Z; Rizvić A
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 Jan; 38():236-244. PubMed ID: 30469017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The efficacy of DNA mixture to mixture matching.
    Bright JA; Taylor D; Kerr Z; Buckleton J; Kruijver M
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 Jul; 41():64-71. PubMed ID: 30986620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. An overall limited effect on the weight-of-evidence when taking STR DNA sequence polymorphism into account in kinship analysis.
    Staadig A; Tillmar A
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 Mar; 39():44-49. PubMed ID: 30544009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Curiosities of X chromosomal markers and haplotypes.
    Kling D
    Int J Legal Med; 2018 Mar; 132(2):361-371. PubMed ID: 28547136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.