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 *

172 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35634572)

  • 1. Advancing a paradigm shift in evaluation of forensic evidence: The rise of forensic data science.
    Morrison GS
    Forensic Sci Int Synerg; 2022; 5():100270. PubMed ID: 35634572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Finding the way forward for forensic science in the US-A commentary on the PCAST report.
    Evett IW; Berger CEH; Buckleton JS; Champod C; Jackson G
    Forensic Sci Int; 2017 Sep; 278():16-23. PubMed ID: 28688344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A comment on the PCAST report: Skip the "match"/"non-match" stage.
    Morrison GS; Kaye DH; Balding DJ; Taylor D; Dawid P; Aitken CGG; Gittelson S; Zadora G; Robertson B; Willis S; Pope S; Neil M; Martire KA; Hepler A; Gill RD; Jamieson A; de Zoete J; Ostrum RB; Caliebe A
    Forensic Sci Int; 2017 Mar; 272():e7-e9. PubMed ID: 27817943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Australian forensic textile damage examinations - Finding a way forward since PCAST.
    Sloan K; Fergusson M; Robertson J
    Sci Justice; 2019 Mar; 59(2):145-152. PubMed ID: 30798861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. What should a forensic practitioner's likelihood ratio be? II.
    Morrison GS
    Sci Justice; 2017 Nov; 57(6):472-476. PubMed ID: 29173462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Forensic voice comparison and the paradigm shift.
    Morrison GS
    Sci Justice; 2009 Dec; 49(4):298-308. PubMed ID: 20120610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Registered reports in forensic science.
    Houck MM; Chin J; Swofford H; Gibb C
    R Soc Open Sci; 2022 Nov; 9(11):221076. PubMed ID: 36465679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Consensus on validation of forensic voice comparison.
    Morrison GS; Enzinger E; Hughes V; Jessen M; Meuwly D; Neumann C; Planting S; Thompson WC; van der Vloed D; Ypma RJF; Zhang C; Anonymous A; Anonymous B
    Sci Justice; 2021 May; 61(3):299-309. PubMed ID: 33985678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The interface between forensic science and technology: how technology could cause a paradigm shift in the role of forensic institutes in the criminal justice system.
    Kloosterman A; Mapes A; Geradts Z; van Eijk E; Koper C; van den Berg J; Verheij S; van der Steen M; van Asten A
    Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci; 2015 Aug; 370(1674):. PubMed ID: 26101289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The logic of forensic pathology opinion.
    de Boer HH; Fronczek J; Berger CEH; Sjerps M
    Int J Legal Med; 2022 Jul; 136(4):1027-1036. PubMed ID: 34988615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Swapping Carrots for Sticks: Forensic science provider views of the Forensic Regulator Act 2021.
    Nsiah Amoako E; McCartney C
    Sci Justice; 2022 Sep; 62(5):506-514. PubMed ID: 36336443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dataset of Digitized RACs and Their Rarity Score Analysis for Strengthening Shoeprint Evidence.
    Wiesner S; Shor Y; Tsach T; Kaplan-Damary N; Yekutieli Y
    J Forensic Sci; 2020 May; 65(3):762-774. PubMed ID: 31738459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Issues and opportunities: the application of the numerical likelihood ratio framework to forensic speaker comparison.
    Gold E; Hughes V
    Sci Justice; 2014 Jul; 54(4):292-9. PubMed ID: 25002047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A Bayesian approach for the analysis of error rate studies in forensic science.
    Hendricks JH; Neumann C
    Forensic Sci Int; 2020 Jan; 306():110047. PubMed ID: 31821943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Latent print quality in blind proficiency testing: Using quality metrics to examine laboratory performance.
    Gardner BO; Neuman M; Kelley S
    Forensic Sci Int; 2021 Jul; 324():110823. PubMed ID: 34004529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.