The state of New Hampshire follows the Daubert test to determine the admissibility of expert witness testimony. Baker Valley Lumber, Inc. v. Ingersoll-Rand Co., 813 A.2d 409 (N.H. 2002). The focus of this test is on the methodology used by the expert and not on the conclusions the expert testifies to. Id. Under this test, the court should consider: “(1) whether the results of the different etiology used … are capable of being tested; (2) whether the use of such a different etiology has been subjected to peer review and publication; (3) the error rate of … conclusions based upon this differential etiology, and (4) whether there is general acceptance in the scientific community.” Id. The court should not treat these factors as a “definitive” test, but instead should use these factors to guide the court’s analysis. Id. If an expert’s methodology is unable to meet all of these factors it does not automatically mean that the evidence is inadmissible. Id. Lastly, the court should never weigh the credibility of the expert’s conclusions, but only analyze the methodology used by the expert to reach said conclusions. Id.