174 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9212529)
21. 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]
22. 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]
23. Neurolitigation: a perspective on the elements of expert testimony for extending the Daubert challenge.
Klee CH; Friedman HJ
NeuroRehabilitation; 2001; 16(2):79-85. PubMed ID: 11568465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. The weight of scientific evidence in policy and law.
Krimsky S
Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S129-36. PubMed ID: 16030328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. The case against differential diagnosis: Daubert, medical causation testimony, and the scientific method.
Hollingsworth JG; Lasker EG
J Health Law; 2004; 37(1):85-111. PubMed ID: 15191237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Forensic identification science evidence since Daubert: Part I--A quantitative analysis of the exclusion of forensic identification science evidence.
Page M; Taylor J; Blenkin M
J Forensic Sci; 2011 Sep; 56(5):1180-4. PubMed ID: 21884119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Expertise in law, medicine, and health care.
Shuman DW
J Health Polit Policy Law; 2001 Apr; 26(2):267-90. PubMed ID: 11330081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. 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]
29. Scientific evidence in the courtroom. The death of the Frye rule.
Annas GJ
N Engl J Med; 1994 Apr; 330(14):1018-21. PubMed ID: 8121456
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Medical-legal analysis and considerations in product liability cases involving pharmaceutical companies.
Woodside FC; Grunes AP; Comodeca JA
Leg Med; 1989; ():125-43. PubMed ID: 2700004
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Marion Merrell Dow - historical perspective of a "merging" company.
Irwin TR
Pharm Hist (Lond); 1994 Jun; 24(2):7-12. PubMed ID: 11616314
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. 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]
34. Science v. law. A decade-old rule on scientific evidence comes under fire.
Brickley P
Sci Am; 2003 Dec; 289(6):30-2. PubMed ID: 14631724
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Scientific inferences in the laboratory and the law.
Cranor C
Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S121-8. PubMed ID: 16030327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. A critical examination of the post-Daubert scientific evidence landscape.
Kesan JP
Food Drug Law J; 1997; 52(2):225-51. PubMed ID: 10557562
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Medical malpractice. An historical perspective.
Costante PA; Puro JS
N J Med; 2003; 100(7-8):21-5. PubMed ID: 12955802
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. The trials and tribulations of two historians: adjudicating responsibility for pollution and personal harm.
Rosner D; Markowitz G
Med Hist; 2009 Apr; 53(2):271-92. PubMed ID: 19367349
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Admissibility of neuropsychological testimony after Daubert and Kumho.
Stern BH
NeuroRehabilitation; 2001; 16(2):93-101. PubMed ID: 11568467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Cause and effect? Assessing postmarketing safety studies as evidence of causation in products liability cases.
Shea LL; Hanson A; Guglielmetti TM; Levy K
Food Drug Law J; 2007; 62(3):445-72. PubMed ID: 17915388
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
