Page 20

Bibliography

Anderson, Frederick R. November 29, 1991 . The legal system obstructs science. The Atlanta Journal and Constitution.

Barton, John H. 2000 . Reforming the patent system. Science 287: 1933-1934.

Berger, Margaret. 2000 . The Supreme Court's trilogy on the admissibility of expert evidence. In: Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence. Washington, D.C. : Federal Judicial Center .

Blumenthal, David; Eric G. Campbell; Melissa S. Anderson; Nancyanne Causino; and Karen Seashore Louis. 1997 . Withholding research results in academic life science: Evidence from a National Survey of Faculty. Journal of the American Medical Association 277: 1224–1228.

Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and the Government. 1993 . Science and Technology in Judicial Decision Making. New York : Carnegie Corporation .

Cecil, Joe S., and Gerald T. Wetherington. 1996 . Special Editors, Court-Ordered Disclosure of Academic Research: A Clash of Values of Science and Law. Law and Contemporary Problems 59: no. 3.

Cohen, Linda, and Robert W. Hahn. 1999 . A solution to concerns over public access to scientific data. Science 285: 535-536.

Enserink, Martin. 2000 . Biomedical Patents. Patent Office may raise the bar on gene claims. Science 287: 1196-1197.

Fischer, Paul M. 1996 . Science and subpoenas: When do the courts become instruments of manipulation? Law and Contemporary Problems 59, no. 159.

Hamilton, Heather G. 1998 . The Movement from Frye to Daubert: Where do the states stand? Jurimetrics Journal 38: 201-213.

Heller, Michael, and Rebecca S. Eisenberg. 1998 . Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science 280: 698–701.

Hulka, Barbara, Nancy L. Kerkvliet, and Peter Tugwell. 2000 . Sounding Board: Experience of a scientific panel formed to advise the federal judiciary on silicone breast implants. The New England Journal of Medicine 342: 812-815.

Kaiser, Jocelyn. 1997a . Showdown over clean air science. Science 277: 466-469.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 20
Page 20 Bibliography Anderson, Frederick R. November 29, 1991 . The legal system obstructs science. The Atlanta Journal and Constitution. Barton, John H. 2000 . Reforming the patent system. Science 287: 1933-1934. Berger, Margaret. 2000 . The Supreme Court's trilogy on the admissibility of expert evidence. In: Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence. Washington, D.C. : Federal Judicial Center . Blumenthal, David; Eric G. Campbell; Melissa S. Anderson; Nancyanne Causino; and Karen Seashore Louis. 1997 . Withholding research results in academic life science: Evidence from a National Survey of Faculty. Journal of the American Medical Association 277: 1224–1228. Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and the Government. 1993 . Science and Technology in Judicial Decision Making. New York : Carnegie Corporation . Cecil, Joe S., and Gerald T. Wetherington. 1996 . Special Editors, Court-Ordered Disclosure of Academic Research: A Clash of Values of Science and Law. Law and Contemporary Problems 59: no. 3. Cohen, Linda, and Robert W. Hahn. 1999 . A solution to concerns over public access to scientific data. Science 285: 535-536. Enserink, Martin. 2000 . Biomedical Patents. Patent Office may raise the bar on gene claims. Science 287: 1196-1197. Fischer, Paul M. 1996 . Science and subpoenas: When do the courts become instruments of manipulation? Law and Contemporary Problems 59, no. 159. Hamilton, Heather G. 1998 . The Movement from Frye to Daubert: Where do the states stand? Jurimetrics Journal 38: 201-213. Heller, Michael, and Rebecca S. Eisenberg. 1998 . Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science 280: 698–701. Hulka, Barbara, Nancy L. Kerkvliet, and Peter Tugwell. 2000 . Sounding Board: Experience of a scientific panel formed to advise the federal judiciary on silicone breast implants. The New England Journal of Medicine 342: 812-815. Kaiser, Jocelyn. 1997a . Showdown over clean air science. Science 277: 466-469.

OCR for page 20
Page 21 Kaiser, Jocelyn. 1997b . Researchers and lawmakers clash over access to data. Science 277: 467. Kaiser, Jocelyn. 1997c . Puzzling over a potential killer's modus operandi. Science 277: 469. Kantrowitz, Arthur. 1967 . Proposal for an institution for scientific judgment. Science 156: 763. Munsterman, G. Thomas, Paula L. Hannaford, and Marc G. Whitehead, eds. 1997 . Jury Trial Innovations. Williamsburg, VA : National Center for State Courts . Office of Management and Budget. 1999 . OMB Circular A-110 Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations. Final revision, effective Nov. 6, 1999. Petroski, Henry. 1999 . Daubert and Kumho. American Scientist 87: 402-406. Picou, J. Steven. 1996 . Compelled disclosure of scholarly research: Some comments on “high stakes” litigation. Law and Contemporary Problems 59: no. 149. Rosenthal, Steven A. 1996 . Secrecy in medical research. The New England Journal of Medicine 334: 392-393.