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 *

103 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8321295)

  • 1. Supreme Court ruling receives warm welcome.
    Greene S
    Nature; 1993 Jul; 364(6433):94. PubMed ID: 8321295
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. United States Supreme Court rules on expert testimony.
    McAbee GN
    Pediatrics; 1995 Jun; 95(6):934-6. PubMed ID: 7761225
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Judicial gatekeeping and the social construction of the admissibility of expert testimony.
    Merlino ML; Murray CI; Richardson JT
    Behav Sci Law; 2008; 26(2):187-206. PubMed ID: 18344168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. UK Supreme Court abolishes immunity for expert witnesses.
    Dyer C
    BMJ; 2011 Mar; 342():d2096. PubMed ID: 21454462
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Immunity for expert witnesses is under threat from a case coming to Supreme Court.
    Dyer C
    BMJ; 2010 Dec; 341():c7337. PubMed ID: 21183566
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The Supreme Court sets standards for engineering expert testimony.
    Richards EP; Walter C
    IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag; 1999; 18(6):83-4, 88. PubMed ID: 10576079
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael.
    Grudzinskas AJ
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1999; 27(3):482-8. PubMed ID: 10509947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Decision of German Supreme Court on July 30, 1999 relating to scientific evidence requirements for psychological expert opinion with respect to credibility of testimony and its consequences for future expert consultation].
    Balloff R
    Prax Kinderpsychol Kinderpsychiatr; 2000 Apr; 49(4):261-74. PubMed ID: 10850124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Reeves decision changes expert witness qualifications.
    Schulte DJ
    J Orofac Pain; 2008; 22(4):364. PubMed ID: 19090409
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Sequestration of lay witnesses and experts.
    Slovenko R
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2004; 32(4):447-50. PubMed ID: 15704631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Daubert, regulation, and the courts.
    Gori GB
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2007 Oct; 49(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 17658206
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Expert witness testimony: the problem and recommendations for oversight and reform.
    McHenry CR; Biffl WL; Chapman WC; Spain DA
    Surgery; 2005 Mar; 137(3):274-8. PubMed ID: 15746775
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. AAOHN advisory. Providing expert testimony.
    AAOHN J; 1998 Jan; 46(1):9a-9b. PubMed ID: 9481213
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Expert testimony: a perspective from the trenches.
    Hawkins TS
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2005 Feb; 2(2):126-30. PubMed ID: 17411781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. College board member and officer expert testimony.
    American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP)
    Ann Emerg Med; 2010 Apr; 55(4):398. PubMed ID: 20346850
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The future of bioethics testimony: guidelines for determining qualifications, reliability, and helpfulness.
    Spielman B; Agich G
    San Diego Law Rev; 1999; 36(4):1043-75. PubMed ID: 12449932
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Expert testimony.
    Griffis CA
    AANA J; 2004 Oct; 72(5):334. PubMed ID: 15529725
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Medical consultation and expert testimony in claims litigation. Professional and ethical guidelines.
    Roberts HJ
    J Insur Med; 1991; 23(2):130-4. PubMed ID: 10148473
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Opinion of the Polish Psychiatric Association Management Office and Polish consultants about the use of forensic psychiatry in expert court testimony].
    Bomba J; Wciórka J; Puzyński S
    Psychiatr Pol; 2004; 38(2):198-200. PubMed ID: 15307285
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Attorney abuses of Daubert hearings: junk science, junk law, or just plain obstruction?
    Gutheil TG; Bursztajn HJ
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2005; 33(2):150-2. PubMed ID: 15985655
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.