157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10108979)
1. How long can Indiana remain a malpractice paradise?
Slomski AJ
Med Econ; 1991 Feb; 68(3):122-5, 129-30, 132 passim. PubMed ID: 10108979
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Tort reform: what works and what doesn't.
Schutte JE
Med Econ; 1988 Apr; 65(8):202-13, 217. PubMed ID: 10286892
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Don't count on Washington for help.
Stevens C
Med Econ; 1988 Apr; 65(8):218-20, 223. PubMed ID: 10286893
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. States adopt new laws to fight malpractice crisis.
Burda D
Hospitals; 1986 Nov; 60(22):32-3. PubMed ID: 3770690
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The malpractice maze: Bowen urges tort reform and state surveillance.
Humm M
Pathologist; 1986 Dec; 40(12):39-40. PubMed ID: 10279904
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Where do we go from here?
Med Econ; 1988 Apr; 65(8):224, 227-8, 230-2. PubMed ID: 10286894
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Indiana's malpractice system: no-fault by accident?
Kinney ED; Gronfein WP
Law Contemp Probl; 1991; 54(1-2):Winter 169-93. PubMed ID: 10114980
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Contingent fees in medical malpractice litigation - a qualitative assessment.
Ottensmeyer DJ; Smith HL; Porter J
West J Med; 1983 Aug; 139(2):239-43. PubMed ID: 6636743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Lessons learned from the "laboratories of democracy": a critique of federal medical liability reform.
Conroy AD
Cornell Law Rev; 2006 Jul; 91(5):1159-202. PubMed ID: 16827219
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. An empirical examination of the equal protection challenge to contingency fee restrictions in medical malpractice reform statutes.
Dwyer CL
Duke Law J; 2006 Nov; 56(2):611-41. PubMed ID: 17302005
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Impact of state tort reforms on physician malpractice payments.
Waters TM; Budetti PP; Claxton G; Lundy JP
Health Aff (Millwood); 2007; 26(2):500-9. PubMed ID: 17339679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Rolling back. Calif. limits malpractice insurer's rate hike.
Romano M
Mod Healthc; 2003 Sep; 33(36):14. PubMed ID: 14520829
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Symposium: The malpractice crisis--a legislative response. The Indiana experience.
LaCava FW
Healthspan; 1986 Feb; 3(2):14-7. PubMed ID: 10276303
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. A three-sided debate on medical malpractice reform.
Healthc Financ Manage; 2003 Mar; 57(3):14-5. PubMed ID: 12747048
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Tying quality to premiums.
Conn J
Mod Healthc; 2005 Aug; 35(34):20. PubMed ID: 16158560
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Seeking shelter from rising malpractice costs.
Norland S
Healthc Financ Manage; 2003 Nov; 57(11):58-64. PubMed ID: 14626706
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Liability reform--concern mounts in state capitols.
Solomon CM
Rev Fed Am Health Syst; 1986; 19(4):56. PubMed ID: 10280566
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Medical malpractice: the States respond.
Health Law Vigil; 1986 Feb; 9(4):11-8. PubMed ID: 10275513
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Indiana adopts malpractice legislation.
Dornette WH
J Leg Med (N Y); 1975 Jun; 3(6):26-8. PubMed ID: 1079839
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The Indiana law.
Bowen OR
Investor Owned Hosp Rev; 1975; 8(3):14-6. PubMed ID: 10241102
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
