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 *

97 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10275182)

  • 1. When the PRO comes to the clinic.
    FitzGerald RM
    Med Group Manage; 1986; 33(1):8. PubMed ID: 10275182
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. HMO/CMP review is up and running (finally).
    Traska MR
    Hospitals; 1987 Nov; 61(21):55-6. PubMed ID: 3311965
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Accrediting medical groups.
    QRC Advis; 1991 Apr; 7(6):5-6. PubMed ID: 10109920
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. What to do when your PRO comes calling.
    Kalifon D
    Med Econ; 1992 Mar; 69(6):184-6, 188, 190. PubMed ID: 10116787
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. JCAH recognizes 120 group practices accredited by AGPA program.
    Group Pract; 1977; 26(1):27-9. PubMed ID: 10297021
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. PRO review of practice patterns.
    Heller C
    Healthspan; 1987 Jul; 4(7):16-7. PubMed ID: 10283098
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. How I fight back when the PRO says "No".
    Davant C
    Med Econ; 1988 Oct; 65(20):40-4. PubMed ID: 10302812
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Groups split from JCAH.
    Health Care Week; 1978 Dec; 2(23):1, 11. PubMed ID: 10324555
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. "PRO" will soon mean "policing reduced options".
    Dehn TG
    Med Econ; 1988 Dec; 65(24):20-1, 25. PubMed ID: 10290906
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Ambulatory medical necessity review in a multispecialty group practice.
    Fishman NT
    Coll Rev; 1989; 6(2):65-77. PubMed ID: 10295429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The impact of nursing documentation on PRO review.
    Lovin FW; Sizemore MD; Dennis RD
    J Am Med Rec Assoc; 1987 Mar; 58(3):20-3. PubMed ID: 10281341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986.
    FitzGerald RM
    Med Group Manage; 1987; 34(5):12-3. PubMed ID: 10284288
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Are you monitoring these critical performance metrics?
    Capitation Rates Data; 2003 May; 8(5):49-52. PubMed ID: 12803101
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. PRO review: strategies for HMOs.
    Siegel SH; Albritton PM; Thornhill MC
    GHAA J; 1988; 9(1):14-21. PubMed ID: 10302958
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Expecting PRO review: here are some practical considerations.
    Aronson P
    Rev Fed Am Hosp; 1985; 18(1):88-91. PubMed ID: 10299866
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The PRO utilization and quality review process: an overview--Part II.
    Politser P
    Bull Am Coll Surg; 1989 Jun; 74(6):18-20. PubMed ID: 10293127
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. PRO regulations proposed.
    McIlrath S
    Am Med News; 1983 Aug; 26(30):1, 18. PubMed ID: 10324386
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. PRO limited review creates controversy, heavy workload.
    Johnsson J
    Contract Healthc; 1988 Sep; ():34-6. PubMed ID: 10302948
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. New requirements issued for PRO scope of work.
    Banach J
    J Am Med Rec Assoc; 1988 Dec; 59(12):24-5. PubMed ID: 10290726
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The PRO: friend or foe?
    Albertson D
    Physicians Manage; 1984 May; 24(5):51-2, 57. PubMed ID: 10310575
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.