References
- Lempert R. The New Evidence Scholarship – analyzing the process of proof. B U L Rev. 1986;66(3–4):439–477.
- Robertson B, Vignaux GA. Interpreting evidence. 1st ed. Chichester, New York, Brisbane, Toronto, Singapore: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; 1995.
- Evett IW, Weir BS. Interpreting DNA evidence: statistical genetics for forensic scientists. 1st ed. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer Assoc; 1998.
- Gill P, Haned H. A new methodological framework to interpret complex DNA profiles using likelihood ratios. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2013;7(2):251–263. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2012.11.002
- Bill M, Gill P, Curran J, Clayton T, Pinchin R, Healy M, et al. PENDULUM - a guideline-based approach to the interpretation of STR mixtures. Forensic Sci Int. 2005;148 2–3):181–189. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.06.037
- Gill P, Kirkham A, Curran J. LoComatioN: A software tool for the analysis of low copy number DNA profiles. Forensic Sci Int. 2006;166(2–3):128–138.
- Perlin MW, Legler MM, Spencer CE, Smith JL, Allan WP, Belrose JL, et al. Validating TrueAllele (R) DNA Mixture Interpretation. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(6):1430–1447. doi: 10.1111/jfo.2011.56.issue-6
- Egeland T, Mostad PF, Mevag B, Stenersen M. Beyond traditional paternity and identification cases. Selecting the most probable pedigree. Forensic Sci Int. 2000;110(1):47–59. doi: 10.1016/S0379-0738(00)00147-X
- Haned H. Forensim: an open-source initiative for the evaluation of statistical methods in forensic genetics. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2011;5(4):265–268. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2010.03.017
- Gjertson DW, Brenner CH, Baur MP, Carracedo A, Guidet F, Luque JA, et al. ISFG: re-commendations on biostatistics in paternity testing. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2007;1(3–4):223–231. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2007.06.006
- Iasonos A, Schrag D, Raj GV, Panageas KS. How to build and interpret a nomogram for cancer prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(8):1364–1370. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.12.9791
- Srinivasan P, Westover MB, Bianchi MT. Propagation of uncertainty in Bayesian diagnostic test interpretation. South Med J. 2012;105(9):452–459. doi: 10.1097/SMJ.0b013e3182621a2c
- Timonen S, Uotila U, Kuusisto P, Lokki O, Vara P. Nomograms for the estimation of the duration of pregnancy on the basis of the maturity of the child. Ann Chir Gynaecol Fenn. 1966;55(4):276–285.
- Fagan TJ. Letter: Nomogram for Bayes theorem. N Engl J Med. 1975;293(5):257.
- Biermann FM, Potente S. The deployment of conditional probability distributions for death time estimation. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;210(1–3):82–86. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.02.007
- Hummel K, Ihm P, Schmidt V. Evaluation of paternity probability determined according to the formula of Essen-Moller with regard to the given mother-child constellation. Description of the methods; tables and graphs. [Dtsch Z Gesamte Gerichtl Med]. 1969;66(3):97–122.
- Balding DJ. Weight-of-evidence for Forensic DNA Profiles. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons; 2005. doi: 10.1002/9780470867693
- Riancho JA, Zarrabeitia MT. The prosecutor’s and defendant’s Bayesian nomograms. Int J Legal Med. 2002;116(5):312–313.
- Hellmich M, Lehmacher W. A ruler for interpreting diagnostic test results. Methods Inf Med. 2005;44(1):124–126.
- Caraguel CG, Vanderstichel R. The two-step Fagan’s nomogram: ad hoc interpretation of a diagnostic test result without calculation. Evid Based Med. 2013;18(4):125–128. doi: 10.1136/eb-2013-101243
- Marasco J, Doerfler R, Roschier L. Doc, what are my chances?. The UMAP Journal. 2011;32(4):279–298.
- Glasziou P. Which methods for bedside Bayes? ACP J Club 2001;135(3):A11–A12.