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 *

221 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10272848)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Wyoming court interprets state peer review shield law.
    Hosp Law Newsl; 1989 May; 6(7):7-8. PubMed ID: 10294155
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Eleventh Circuit allows state action defense in medical staff antitrust case.
    Miller RD
    Hosp Law Newsl; 1989 Jan; 6(3):1-5. PubMed ID: 10292016
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Confidentiality of peer review records.
    IMJ Ill Med J; 1984 Dec; 166(6):409. PubMed ID: 6150918
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Medical staff peer review and federal antitrust scrutiny.
    LaCava FW
    Bull Am Coll Surg; 1985 Aug; 70(8):40-1. PubMed ID: 10272117
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Peer review/hospital privileges/credentialing.
    Springer EW
    Leg Med; 1994; ():57-81. PubMed ID: 7830486
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Peer review splits Calif. medical community.
    Burda D
    Mod Healthc; 1988 Oct; 18(44):98. PubMed ID: 10290221
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Recent decision leaves gap in peer review discovery protections. Pagano v. Oroville Hospital.
    Wisch CJ; Penner IE
    Health Care Law Newsl; 1993 Jul; 8(7):8-12. PubMed ID: 10183883
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Liability for peer review and privilege suspension.
    Davis CD
    Tex Hosp; 1984 Jul; 40(2):42. PubMed ID: 10267575
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Idaho Court: peer review immunity statute valid.
    Hattis PA; McCullum JD
    Health Law Vigil; 1987 Nov; 10(24):1-3. PubMed ID: 10284895
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. If you should lose a peer review suit.
    Holoweiko M
    Med Econ; 1988 Dec; 65(24):140-4, 147-8, 150-1 passim. PubMed ID: 10290905
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. New peer review law provides immunity with obligations.
    Valiant C
    Physician Exec; 1987; 13(3):26-7. PubMed ID: 10312139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Peer review in the wake of Patrick.
    McCormick B
    Trustee; 1988 Jul; 41(7):17. PubMed ID: 10288090
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Antitrust law and the medical staff.
    Holthaus D
    Trustee; 1988 Jul; 41(7):23. PubMed ID: 10288093
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Friedman v. Delaware County Memorial Hospital: judicial protection for good-faith peer review.
    Dalton JF
    Healthspan; 1988 Jan; 5(1):18-21. PubMed ID: 10286662
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Medical peer review under legal knife.
    Kosterlitz J
    Natl J (Wash); 1988 Mar; 20(13):820. PubMed ID: 10286588
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Peer review immunity after Patrick v. Burget.
    Kelly JP
    Healthspan; 1988 Jun; 5(6):2-5. PubMed ID: 10288658
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. When a doctor plays judge.
    Isom DK
    J Fla Med Assoc; 1992 Apr; 79(4):249-51. PubMed ID: 1588298
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Peer review after Patrick.
    Bierig J
    J Health Hosp Law; 1988 Jun; 21(6):135-9. PubMed ID: 10287912
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.