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

167 related items for PubMed ID: 39398691

  • 1. 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]

  • 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 4. Expert witness testimony: rules of engagement.
    Satiani B.
    Vasc Endovascular Surg; 2006 Dec; 40(3):223-7. PubMed ID: 16703210
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Neurolitigation: a perspective on the elements of expert testimony for extending the Daubert challenge.
    Klee CH, Friedman HJ.
    NeuroRehabilitation; 2001 Jul; 16(2):79-85. PubMed ID: 11568465
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

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

  • 10. Meeting a Forensic Podiatry Admissibility Challenge: A Daubert Case Study.
    Nirenberg M.
    J Forensic Sci; 2016 May; 61(3):833-841. PubMed ID: 27122428
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Fixed vs. flexible neuropsychological test batteries under the Daubert standard for the admissibility of scientific evidence.
    Reed JE.
    Behav Sci Law; 1996 May; 14(3):315-22. PubMed ID: 8963383
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. The admissibility of scientific evidence in psychiatric malpractice: junk science and the Daubert case.
    Tancredi LR, Giannini AJ.
    J Clin Forensic Med; 1994 Dec; 1(3):145-8. PubMed ID: 16371283
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. The impact of Daubert on the admissibility of forensic anthropology expert testimony.
    Lesciotto KM.
    J Forensic Sci; 2015 May; 60(3):549-55. PubMed ID: 25716577
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. The war against junk science: the use of expert panels in complex medical-legal scientific litigation.
    Price JM, Rosenberg ES.
    Biomaterials; 1998 Aug; 19(16):1425-32. PubMed ID: 9794513
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Industrial/organizational psychology and the federal judiciary: expert witness testimony and the Daubert standards.
    Wingate PH, Thornton GC.
    Law Hum Behav; 2004 Feb; 28(1):97-114. PubMed ID: 15055343
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Psychological expert witness testimony and judicial decision making trends.
    Shapiro DL, Mixon L, Jackson M, Shook J.
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2015 Feb; 42-43():149-53. PubMed ID: 26341310
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Daubert Considerations in Forensic Evaluations by Telepsychiatry.
    Recupero PR.
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2022 Dec; 50(4):517-528. PubMed ID: 36175121
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 9.