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 *

360 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10278208)

  • 21. Credentialing sparks antitrust suits.
    Stoltzfus WL
    Mod Healthc; 1984 Feb; 14(3):190, 192. PubMed ID: 10265428
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. How to stop a wayward doctor without getting burned.
    Holoweiko M
    Med Econ; 1989 Nov; 66(23):184-8, 191-2, 194 passim. PubMed ID: 10296180
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Medical staff privileges: is antitrust a real issue for providers?
    Enders RJ
    Healthc Financ Manage; 1986 Mar; 40(3):64-70. PubMed ID: 10275454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Antitrust and the credentialing of physicians.
    Miles JJ
    Med Staff Couns; 1987; 1(1):16-25. PubMed ID: 10284308
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Antitrust and hospital peer review.
    Blumstein JF; Sloan FA
    Law Contemp Probl; 1988; 51(2):7-92. PubMed ID: 10295966
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. AHA joins appeal in antitrust case.
    Burda D
    Mod Healthc; 1990 Apr; 20(16):8. PubMed ID: 10104449
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. "State action" doctrine as a defense in antitrust challenges.
    Berg RN
    J Med Assoc Ga; 1985 Feb; 74(2):93-5. PubMed ID: 3838333
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Antitrust claims separate chiropractors, providers.
    Burda D
    Hospitals; 1986 Sep; 60(18):34. PubMed ID: 3744338
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Patrick v. Burget; will the state action doctrine protect bad faith peer review?
    Healthspan; 1988 Feb; 5(2):20-2. PubMed ID: 10288650
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Chiropractors' antitrust lawsuit hangs on whether competition was quashed.
    Horty JF
    Mod Healthc; 1984 Jan; 14(1):170, 172. PubMed ID: 10264403
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 32. Minimum malpractice insurance requirement doesn't violate act.
    Davis CD
    Tex Hosp; 1987 Feb; 42(9):34. PubMed ID: 10281177
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Osteopaths score their biggest court victory yet.
    Brown S
    Med Econ; 1984 Aug; 61(16):230-1, 235-8. PubMed ID: 10278257
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Fifth Circuit: hospitals did not violate the Sherman Act.
    Fraiche DD; Carlson WT
    Health Law Vigil; 1986 Jul; 9(13):2-3. PubMed ID: 10277100
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Patient care not enough as defense for provider conduct.
    Hammaker MK
    Provider; 1987 Dec; 13(12):30-1, 40. PubMed ID: 10285093
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Oregon responds to physicians' fears of peer review.
    Koska MT
    Hospitals; 1990 Jan; 64(1):70-1. PubMed ID: 2294040
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Laying siege to hospital privileges.
    Rose M
    Am J Nurs; 1984 May; 84(5):612-5. PubMed ID: 6586075
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Peer review after Patrick case is alive and well.
    Holthaus D
    Hospitals; 1988 Oct; 62(20):34. PubMed ID: 3169708
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. State-level antitrust laws and state enforcement actions should be considered by hospitals.
    Kemezys KP
    Health Law Vigil; 1983 Jan; 6(2):12-3. PubMed ID: 10278139
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The Patrick case: will it hinder peer review?
    Holthaus D
    Hospitals; 1988 Jun; 62(12):56. PubMed ID: 3378770
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 18.