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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10184047)

  • 21. California Supreme Court requires judicial deference to initial hospital medical staff decisions.
    Christensen JD; Saunders JA
    Health Law Vigil; 1983 Feb; 6(4):4-6. PubMed ID: 10258300
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. California court clarifies medical staff hearing procedures.
    Christensen JD
    Health Law Vigil; 1988 Apr; 11(9):7-8. PubMed ID: 10286816
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Uncertainty and unpredictability in application of peer review privileges statutes.
    Hicks JT
    J Health Hosp Law; 1991 May; 24(5):137-43, 167. PubMed ID: 10110682
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 2013-2014 National Health Law Moot Court Competition problem.
    Bernstein A
    J Leg Med; 2014; 35(3):355-84. PubMed ID: 25207629
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Peer review: confidentiality and privilege.
    Devlin MM
    J Med Pract Manage; 2000; 16(3):165-8. PubMed ID: 11280209
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Themes, doctrine, and pedagogy in the 2013-2014 National Health Law Moot Court Competition problem.
    Bernstein A
    J Leg Med; 2014; 35(3):345-54. PubMed ID: 25207628
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Court denies summary judgment to hospital in physician's discrimination suit. Alexander v. Rush North Shore Medical Center.
    Hershey N
    Hosp Law Newsl; 1995 May; 12(7):5-7. PubMed ID: 10184328
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. This doctor got his privileges back--plus $5.95 million.
    Harsham P
    Med Econ; 1985 Oct; 62(20):75-8, 82. PubMed ID: 10273880
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Where doctors can't confront peers who accuse them.
    Harsham P
    Med Econ; 1985 Sep; 62(18):96-8, 102-6. PubMed ID: 10272848
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Federal court limits federal antitrust jurisdiction over medical staff decisions.
    Christensen JD
    Health Law Vigil; 1984 Jan; 7(1):12-4. PubMed ID: 10264312
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The physician and hospital privileges.
    Hirsh HL
    Med Law; 1984; 3(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 6538632
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Comment: Peer review privilege established by Illinois Medical Studies Act does not extend to investigations undertaken by hospital administrations.
    Mustes JJ; Popovits RM
    J Health Hosp Law; 1988 Aug; 21(8):191-4. PubMed ID: 10288421
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. State medical peer review: high cost but no benefit--is it time for a change?
    Scheutzow SO
    Am J Law Med; 1999; 25(1):7-60. PubMed ID: 10207570
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The Supreme Court, antitrust and the health care field.
    Health Law Vigil; 1982 Oct; 5(22):1-14. PubMed ID: 10257142
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Peer review: confidentiality and privilege--Part Two.
    Devlin MM
    J Med Pract Manage; 2001; 16(5):261-3. PubMed ID: 11345885
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The battle for hospital privileges. III. The antitrust frontier.
    Tabor WJ
    JAMA; 1984 Mar 23-30; 251(12):1602-5. PubMed ID: 6700060
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Letters of reference to remain confidential.
    Carter W
    Hosp Q; 2000-2001 Winter; 4(2):61. PubMed ID: 11592248
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Law guards M.D.'s privacy, but gives board access to psychiatric records.
    Horty JF
    Mod Healthc; 1982 Sep; 12(9):102. PubMed ID: 10256752
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The hospital corporate negligence doctrine.
    Savella D
    Health Matrix; 1984; 2(1):43-6. PubMed ID: 10269060
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. New ruling in NC affirms peer review privacy.
    Hosp Peer Rev; 1999 Oct; 24(10):153-4. PubMed ID: 10621281
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.