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 *

143 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36763027)

  • 1. Standard of Care in Medical Malpractice: Deference, Daubert, or Different Direction.
    Gvozdenovic M
    J Law Med; 2022 Dec; 29(4):1220-1235. PubMed ID: 36763027
    [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. Osteopathic physicians and expert medical testimony.
    McAbee GN
    J Am Osteopath Assoc; 1997 Jan; 97(1):47-8. PubMed ID: 9029880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals: a new standard for scientific evidence in the courts?
    Zonana H
    Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1994; 22(3):309-25. PubMed ID: 7841504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Admissibility of scientific evidence post-Daubert.
    Masten J; Strzelczyk JJ
    Health Phys; 2001 Dec; 81(6):678-82. PubMed ID: 11725886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. What has a decade of Daubert wrought?
    Berger MA
    Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S59-65. PubMed ID: 16030340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Assisting judges in screening medical practice guidelines for health care litigation.
    Zweig FM; Witte HA
    Jt Comm J Qual Improv; 1993 Aug; 19(8):342-54. PubMed ID: 8220816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Psychological evidence at the dawn of the law's scientific age.
    Faigman DL; Monahan J
    Annu Rev Psychol; 2005; 56():631-59. PubMed ID: 15709949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The expert witness. Neither Frye nor Daubert solved the problem: what can be done?
    Kaufman HH
    Sci Justice; 2001; 41(1):7-20. PubMed ID: 11215302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Application of the Supreme Court's Daubert criteria in radiation litigation.
    Merwin SE; Moeller DW; Kennedy WE; Moeller MP
    Health Phys; 2001 Dec; 81(6):670-7. PubMed ID: 11725885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Admissibility and per se exclusion of hypnotically elicited recall in American courts of law.
    Perry C
    Int J Clin Exp Hypn; 1997 Jul; 45(3):266-79. PubMed ID: 9204639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Admissibility of scientific evidence in courts.
    Davies J
    Med Law; 2005 Jun; 24(2):243-57. PubMed ID: 16082863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Post-Daubert admissibility of scientific evidence on malingering of cognitive deficits.
    Vallabhajosula B; van Gorp WG
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2001; 29(2):207-15. PubMed ID: 11471788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Ten years of judicial gatekeeping under Daubert.
    Cecil JS
    Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S74-80. PubMed ID: 16030342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Trial and error: the Supreme Court's philosophy of science.
    Haack S
    Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S66-73. PubMed ID: 16030341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A hybrid decision framework for evaluating psychometric evidence.
    Marlowe DB
    Behav Sci Law; 1995; 13(2):207-28. PubMed ID: 10150377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.