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 *

317 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10278231)

  • 1. U.S. District Court finds Blue Shield physician payment method violates Sec. 1 of the Sherman Act.
    Laurence K; Kinney ED
    Health Law Vigil; 1984 Mar; 7(7):4-7. PubMed ID: 10278231
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Court decisions give Blues plans one win, one loss in separate antitrust cases.
    Halper HR; Kazon PM
    Bus Health; 1987 Mar; 4(5):51-2. PubMed ID: 10280673
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Minimizing antitrust risks of Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans.
    Steele CJ
    J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1988; 4():227-72. PubMed ID: 10288422
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. On "FTC Sings the Blues" and its respondents.
    Weller CD
    J Health Polit Policy Law; 1982; 7(2):547-58. PubMed ID: 7108176
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. "Blues interfered illegally with HMO.".
    Burda D
    Mod Healthc; 1987 Nov; 17(24):12. PubMed ID: 10284683
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Ball Memorial Hospital: Section 2 Sherman Act analysis in the alternative health care delivery market.
    Kirsch T
    Am J Law Med; 1988; 14(2-3):249-79. PubMed ID: 3072878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Vertical restraints among hospitals, physicians and health insurers that raise rivals' costs. A case study of Reazin v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas, Inc. and Ocean State Physicians Health Plan, Inc. v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Rhode Island.
    Baker JB
    Am J Law Med; 1988; 14(2-3):147-69. PubMed ID: 3245541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Blue Shield's ban on balance billing found an "unreasonable restraint on competition".
    Employee Benefit Plan Rev; 1984 Aug; 39(2):97-8. PubMed ID: 10278262
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Can Blue Shield offer data processing services to doctors, in competition with commercial data processing services?
    Morse HN
    Med Electron; 1985 Apr; 16(2):12. PubMed ID: 10271578
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Recoupment: fear, confusion, and a court date.
    Jones DB
    Tex Med; 1987 Dec; 83(12):47-9. PubMed ID: 3321522
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Federal District Court refuses to apply "per se" rule in antitrust challenge to third party reimbursement policies.
    O'Brien JP
    Health Law Vigil; 1982 Aug; 5(17):6-8. PubMed ID: 10256277
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Arizona v. Maricopa County: a stern antitrust warning to healthcare providers.
    Halper HR
    Healthc Financ Manage; 1982 Oct; 36(10):38-42. PubMed ID: 10315212
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Blue Cross and Blue Shield Plan contracts with providers: cost containment objectives amid conflicting legislative schemes.
    Heitler G; Ader M
    J Leg Med; 1981 Sep; 2(3):265-96. PubMed ID: 6976401
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Medicare recoupment of alleged "overpayments".
    Wilcox DP
    Tex Med; 1987 Dec; 83(12):51-3. PubMed ID: 3321523
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Vertical restraints and powerful health insurers: exclusionary conduct masquerading as managed care?
    Miller FH
    Law Contemp Probl; 1988; 51(2):195-236. PubMed ID: 10295963
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comment on Kartell v. Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Inc.: an antitrust analysis of Blue Shield's reimbursement schemes.
    Wayne AB
    Am J Law Med; 1986; 11(4):465-500. PubMed ID: 3591810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Court overturns jury's verdict on Blue Cross antitrust violation claim.
    Kazon PM
    Bus Health; 1988 Nov; 6(1):44-5. PubMed ID: 10290529
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Blues' discount policy seen as antitrust issue.
    Burda D
    Hospitals; 1986 Nov; 60(21):36. PubMed ID: 3770662
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Court amends its opinion in Marshfield Clinic ruling.
    Jaklevic MC
    Mod Healthc; 1995 Oct; 25(43):24. PubMed ID: 10152104
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Antitrust charges fail to slow PPA action by insurer.
    Burda D
    Hospitals; 1986 Apr; 60(8):68-70. PubMed ID: 3754236
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.