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.
123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10184707)
21. Physician data bank details still undisclosed. Nelson S Hospitals; 1987 Oct; 61(20):63-4. PubMed ID: 3653868 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. The path to peerless peer review. Due process key to avoiding physician litigation. Bednar AL Healthc Leadersh Manag Rep; 2003 Sep; 11(9):1-3, 5-7. PubMed ID: 14677430 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Doing time for clinical crime: the prosecution of incompetent physicians as an additional mechanism to assure quality health care. McCarthy KM Seton Hall Law Rev; 1997; 28(2):569-619. PubMed ID: 10569836 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Is HCQIA (Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986) protecting peer review from antitrust claims? Cross LL Healthspan; 1993 Jun; 10(6):11-3. PubMed ID: 10127301 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. The Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill. Frizelle F N Z Med J; 2002 Nov; 115(1166):U254. PubMed ID: 12552273 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. The co-regulation of medical discipline: challenging medical peer review. Thomas D J Law Med; 2004 Feb; 11(3):382-9. PubMed ID: 15018214 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. State medical boards. Future challenges for regulation and quality enhancement of medical care. Thompson JN; Robin LA J Leg Med; 2012 Jan; 33(1):93-114. PubMed ID: 22439709 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Antitrust law: a remedy for poor peer review. Peacock EE Bull Am Coll Surg; 1996 Mar; 81(3):35-40. PubMed ID: 10156758 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Fair Evaluations, No Witch Hunts. Berlin J Tex Med; 2015 Aug; 111(8):63-9. PubMed ID: 26263523 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. CLIA--Part 3. Is CLIA understood by clinical laboratorians? Passey RB MLO Med Lab Obs; 1994 Jul; 26(7):54-9. PubMed ID: 10135670 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Federal court's decisions will clarify the Health Care Quality Improvement Act. Brown LC; Penner IE Health Syst Rev; 1994; 27(4):35-7. PubMed ID: 10135422 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Patient's response on hospital survey form prompts libel suit. Morrman v. Khan. Hosp Law Newsl; 2003 Sep; 20(11):5-6. PubMed ID: 12934321 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. 2003 Schwartz Award. Pitfalls of peer review. The limited protections of state and federal peer review law for physicians. Nijm LM J Leg Med; 2003 Dec; 24(4):541-56. PubMed ID: 14660324 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. A doctor in the House of Lords. Turnberg L Clin Med (Lond); 2007; 7(1):14-5. PubMed ID: 17348567 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. [Quality assurance in surgical gynecology from the legal viewpoint]. Ratzel R Zentralbl Gynakol; 1995; 117(12):674-5. PubMed ID: 8585364 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. [Liability of the hospital administration for shortage of nurses and competent personnel in the infant nursery]. Uphoff R Kinderkrankenschwester; 2014 Aug; 33(8):317-8. PubMed ID: 25199266 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Jury selection in malpractice suits: an investigation of community attitudes toward malpractice and physicians. Brodsky SL; Knowles RI; Cotter PR; Herring GH Int J Law Psychiatry; 1991; 14(3):215-22. PubMed ID: 1864688 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]