In Miller v. Bike Athletic Co. (1998), 80 Ohio St.3d 607, 611, 1998 Ohio 178, 687 N.E.2d 735, the Supreme Court stated that "the reliability requirement of Daubert should not be used to exclude all evidence of questionable reliability, nor should a court exclude such evidence simply because the evidence is confusing. In re Paoli RR. Yard PCB Litigation (C.A.3, 1994), 35 F.3d 717, 744. Instead, there must be something that makes the scientific technique particularly overwhelming to laypersons for the court to exclude such evidence. Id. at 746. Thus, the 'ultimate touchstone is helpfulness to the trier of fact, and with regard to reliability, helpfulness turns on whether the expert's technique or principle is sufficiently reliable so that it will aid the jury in reaching accurate results.' DeLuca v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (C.A.3, 1990), 911 F.2d 941, 956, quoting 3 Weinstein's Evidence (1988) 702-35, Section 70203."