Reply to Response to Vacuous standards – subversion of the OSAC standards-development process

Geoffrey Stewart Morrison, Cedric Neumann, Patrick Henry Geoghegan, Gary Edmond, Tim Grant, R. Brent Ostrum, Paul Roberts, Michael Saks, Denise Syndercombe Court, William C. Thompson, Sandy Zabell

Research output: Contribution to journalLetter, comment or opinionpeer-review

Abstract

This Letter to the Editor is a reply to Mohammed et al. (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2021.100145, which in turn is a response to Morrison et al. (2020) “Vacuous standards – subversion of the OSAC standards-development process” https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2020.06.005.
Original languageEnglish
Article number100149
JournalForensic Science International: Synergy
Volume3
Early online date3 May 2021
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2021

Bibliographical note

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

Keywords

  • Forensic science
  • Method validation
  • Quality management
  • Standard
  • Validation

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Reply to Response to Vacuous standards – subversion of the OSAC standards-development process'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this