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.
157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10170695)
1. A second look at second surgical opinions. Rosenberg SN; Perlis H; Lynne D; Leto L Bus Health; 1991 Feb; 9(2):14-6, 19, 22 passim. PubMed ID: 10170695 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Second opinion programs: continued savings from nonconfirmed surgeries. Chu A; Lavoie V; McCarthy EG Empl Benefits J; 1992 Sep; 17(3):35-40. PubMed ID: 10171221 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Second opinion plans seen saving money. Piontek S Natl Underwrit Life Health; 1981 Feb; 85(8):1, 20-1. PubMed ID: 10317067 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Second opinions in perspective. McCarthy EG Bus Health; 1983 Dec; 1(2):5-8. PubMed ID: 10317435 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The use and value of third surgical opinions. McCarthy EG; Tucker J; Astor L Health Cost Manage; 1987; 4(3):12-9. PubMed ID: 10317900 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. How much will second opinions cut patient loads? Kirchner M Med Econ; 1980 May; 57(10):178-89. PubMed ID: 10316967 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Second opinion: a tool to save money, improve care. Hanley RJ; Ayers JT Bus Health; 1985 Mar; 2(4):22-4. PubMed ID: 10317563 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Second opinions and cost-effectiveness: the questions continue. Peebles RJ Bull Am Coll Surg; 1991 Jun; 76(6):18-25. PubMed ID: 10170735 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Second surgical opinions: savings or waste? Callen D Healthtexas; 1989 May; 44(11):26-8. PubMed ID: 10318239 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Second surgical opinion programs: evaluation deficiencies. Dunham MH; Hunt VB Wis Med J; 1984 Apr; 83(4):23-4. PubMed ID: 6428066 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Second opinions save New York $2 million. Bus Insur; 1985 Jan; 19(3):14. PubMed ID: 10317547 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The pre-estimate program: an effective way to reduce surgical fees while preserving high quality care and patient choice. Grossi M; Yu J; Astor L; McCarthy E Empl Benefits J; 1989 Dec; 14(4):2-5. PubMed ID: 10296774 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Second look at second opinions. Time; 1981 Jan; 117(1):87. PubMed ID: 10317037 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Second surgical opinion: more emphasis needed. Alkire A Natl Underwrit Life Health; 1981 Mar; 85(13):11, 33. PubMed ID: 10317080 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of a surgical second opinion program. Schachter M; Oppenheimer G; Cannoodt L; Sieverts S QRB Qual Rev Bull; 1983 Jan; 9(1):11-9. PubMed ID: 6403901 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Do second surgical opinion programs save? Mod Healthc; 1979 Feb; 9(2):7. PubMed ID: 153465 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Confirming diagnosis for elective surgery saved 2 NYC health and welfare funds $581,873. Employee Benefit Plan Rev; 1975 Feb; 29(8):30-1. PubMed ID: 10316866 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Second opinion program reduces surgical procedures, produces no net savings. Employee Benefit Plan Rev; 1977 Dec; 32(6):53-4. PubMed ID: 10316529 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Insurer would cut rates for second-surgical-opinion plans. Med World News; 1979 Feb; 20(3):28. PubMed ID: 10316772 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Cost containment by a third party payer: negotiations of surgical fees. Kamons AS; Goldman F; McCarthy EG; Rupp A Empl Benefits J; 1980; 5(1):2-9, 23-4. PubMed ID: 10316937 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]