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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

217 related items for PubMed ID: 27122428

  • 21. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22. The case against differential diagnosis: Daubert, medical causation testimony, and the scientific method.
    Hollingsworth JG, Lasker EG.
    J Health Law; 2004 Sep; 37(1):85-111. PubMed ID: 15191237
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23. Should human figure drawings be admitted into court?
    Lally SJ.
    J Pers Assess; 2001 Feb; 76(1):135-49. PubMed ID: 11206294
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24. Predicting the present: expert testimony and civil commitment.
    Schopp RF, Quattrocchi MR.
    Behav Sci Law; 1995 Feb; 13(2):159-81. PubMed ID: 10150376
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 26.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27. Forensic identification science evidence since Daubert: Part II--judicial reasoning in decisions to exclude forensic identification evidence on grounds of reliability.
    Page M, Taylor J, Blenkin M.
    J Forensic Sci; 2011 Jul; 56(4):913-7. PubMed ID: 21729081
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28. The effectiveness of opposing expert witnesses for educating jurors about unreliable expert evidence.
    Levett LM, Kovera MB.
    Law Hum Behav; 2008 Aug; 32(4):363-74. PubMed ID: 17940854
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 30.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. Expert scientific evidence in the Israeli court.
    Sahar A.
    Med Law; 2007 Jun; 26(2):257-82. PubMed ID: 17639850
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32. Black Robes and White Coats: Daubert Standard and Medical and Legal Considerations for Medical Expert Witnesses.
    Pergolizzi J, LeQuang JAK.
    Cureus; 2024 Sep; 16(9):e69346. PubMed ID: 39398691
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 35. False confessions, expert testimony, and admissibility.
    Watson C, Weiss KJ, Pouncey C.
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2010 Sep; 38(2):174-86. PubMed ID: 20542936
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37. A Brief History of the Expert Witness.
    Milroy CM.
    Acad Forensic Pathol; 2017 Dec; 7(4):516-526. PubMed ID: 31240003
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38. Admissibility of neuropsychological testimony after Daubert and Kumho.
    Stern BH.
    NeuroRehabilitation; 2001 Dec; 16(2):93-101. PubMed ID: 11568467
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 11.