200 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10223027)
1. FL: does peer review apply to nurses notes?: defendant dr. attempts to invoke peer privilege.
Regan Rep Nurs Law; 1999 Feb; 39(9):3. PubMed ID: 10223027
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. The peer review privilege: what documents are protected from discovery in litigation.
Smart CM
Mo Med; 1998 May; 95(5):205-6. PubMed ID: 9604664
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. The future for peer review. Florida's constitutional amendment chills quality community.
Glabman M
Trustee; 2005 Apr; 58(4):6-10, 12, 1. PubMed ID: 15881498
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. How to protect confidentiality during the contracting process.
Mishek MG; Whitmore MR; Blazevic DJ
QRC Advis; 1995 Feb; 11(4):1-5. PubMed ID: 10140293
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Promoting better health care: policy arguments for concurrent quality assurance and attorney-client hospital incident report privileges.
Dollar CJ
Health Matrix Clevel; 1993; 3(1):259-308. PubMed ID: 10138438
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Friend of the court.
Tex Med; 1997 Jul; 93(7):24-6. PubMed ID: 9226986
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The embryonic self-evaluative privilege: a primer for health care lawyers.
O'Neill TF; Charnes AH
Ann Health Law; 1996; (5):33-44. PubMed ID: 10164520
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Facing the limits on uses of medical and peer review information: are high technology and confidentiality on a collision course?
Brown LC; Stanton WC; Paye W
Whittier Law Rev; 1997; 19(1):97-118. PubMed ID: 12071205
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Legal review: a case study from California--the sharing of peer review information between hospitals and nonhospital providers.
Brown LC
Top Health Inf Manage; 1994 May; 14(4):68-73. PubMed ID: 10134763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Peer-review records can be subpoenaed.
Hallam K; Moore JD
Mod Healthc; 1999 Jun; 29(24):3, 16. PubMed ID: 10538573
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Evidence: discovery and "medical peer review" committee privileges.
Halpern A
J Law Med Ethics; 2000; 28(4):406-7. PubMed ID: 11317431
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Courts examine use of peer review documents. Young v. Saldanha; Ashokan v. Nevada.
Hosp Law Newsl; 1994 Jun; 11(8):5-8. PubMed ID: 10184108
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The Health Care Complaints Commission and nurses.
Cohen S
Lamp; 1998 Mar; 55(2):30-1. PubMed ID: 10025314
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The importance of keeping patient records secure and confidential.
Castledine G
Br J Nurs; 2006 Apr 27-May 10; 15(8):466. PubMed ID: 16723955
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Nurse attorney notes. Documentation--an Rx for success.
McAuliffe DM
Fla Nurse; 1996 May; 44(5):13. PubMed ID: 8717025
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Legal update: a Maryland peer review case.
Isele WP
Conn Med; 1981 Mar; 45(3):191. PubMed ID: 7238028
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Peer review: confidentiality and privilege.
Devlin MM
J Med Pract Manage; 2000; 16(3):165-8. PubMed ID: 11280209
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Is hospital peer review evidence admissible?
J Med Pract Manage; 2000; 15(5):221. PubMed ID: 10915510
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
