These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10169582)
1. An FP wins a harrowing battle in the obstetrics turf war. Finger AL Med Econ; 1997 Aug; 74(17):116-8, 121-3, 128-30. PubMed ID: 10169582 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Trouble in a health-planners' paradise. Rosenberg CL Med Econ; 1978 Aug; 55(16):176-82. PubMed ID: 10308399 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Hospital peer review is a kangaroo court. Townend DW Med Econ; 2000 Feb; 77(3):133-6, 141. PubMed ID: 10848200 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Forming a department of family practice in a community hospital. Wadland WC; Eustis MA; Bollin K J Fam Pract; 1985 May; 20(5):503-5. PubMed ID: 3989490 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Privileging and consultation in maternity and newborn care. Maternity and Newborn Care Committee. Goluboff S; Reynolds L; Klein M; Handfield-Jones R Can Fam Physician; 2000 Sep; 46():1716-8, 1725-8. PubMed ID: 11013785 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Peer review potpourri: new developments in credentialing and privileging. Panel discussion. Kadzielski MA; Meinhardt RA; McCabe TA Spec Law Dig Health Care Law; 1995 Apr; (194):9-31. PubMed ID: 10144588 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Special report: new paradigms in credentialing. Peer review process called into question. Hosp Peer Rev; 1999 Aug; 24(8):123-6. PubMed ID: 10621289 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. 'Frontier' hospitals fight for survival. Japsen B Mod Healthc; 1995 May; 25(20):36-40, 42, 44. PubMed ID: 10142285 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Developments in peer review. Kinderman K J Med Pract Manage; 2002; 17(5):251-3. PubMed ID: 12058695 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The physicians practice profile: a piece of the quality puzzle. Roth LG Physician Exec; 1991; 17(5):16-21. PubMed ID: 10114717 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A tale of two doctors. Hershey N Hosp Law Newsl; 1995 Jan; 12(3):3-8. PubMed ID: 10139499 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Maryland Court rejects challenge to peer review processes. Sadler v. Dimensions Health Corporation. Hosp Law Newsl; 2002 Nov; 20(1):5-7. PubMed ID: 12412313 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. HCQIA immunity: one win and one loss. Hershey N Hosp Law Newsl; 2004 Aug; 21(10):1-8. PubMed ID: 15354911 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. FPs vs. OBGs: a battle over babies. Holoweiko M Med Econ; 1979 Jun; 56(13):129-30, 132, 135. PubMed ID: 10242267 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Evidentiary privilege for peer review documents rejected by the Fourth Circuit. Virmani v. Novant Health Inc. Hosp Law Newsl; 2002 May; 19(7):6-8. PubMed ID: 11989437 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Staff privileges--$2 million antitrust judgment reversed. Carlson DR Health Law Vigil; 1986 Oct; 9(21):1-4. PubMed ID: 10284024 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Civil rights claims and physician peer review. Kadzielski M; Marino SP Cost Qual Q J; 1999 Jun; 5(2):10-4. PubMed ID: 10539004 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]