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 *

233 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10285506)

  • 1. Groups seek protection for peer review.
    Burda D
    Mod Healthc; 1988 Jan; 18(4):4. PubMed ID: 10285506
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. What competition can do to peer review.
    Holoweiko M
    Med Econ; 1985 Aug; 62(17):122-7, 131-9. PubMed ID: 10278339
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. States can't shield peer review from antitrust--high court.
    Burda D
    Mod Healthc; 1988 May; 18(21):5. PubMed ID: 10324515
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Avoiding antitrust pitfalls in peer assistance programs.
    Hammaker MK
    J Am Health Care Assoc; 1985 Sep; 11(5):51-2. PubMed ID: 10272795
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Courts and Congress shield peer review process from antitrust liability.
    Halper HR
    Bus Health; 1987 Jan; 4(3):59. PubMed ID: 10280004
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Impact of Patrick v Burget.
    JCAH Perspect; 1986; 6(7-8):7-9. PubMed ID: 10289700
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Perspectives. The Patrick case: implications for peer review.
    Mcgraw Hills Med Health; 1988 May; 42(22):suppl 4 p.. PubMed ID: 10287491
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. High court's override on Patrick renews concerns about peer review risk.
    Halper HR; Kazon PM
    Bus Health; 1988 Jul; 5(9):40-1. PubMed ID: 10288490
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Appeals Court limits antitrust review of physician-hospital disputes.
    Christensen JD
    Health Law Vigil; 1988 Sep; 11(19):3-4. PubMed ID: 10288887
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Antitrust. Is quality review in jeopardy?
    Pollner F
    Med World News; 1988 Jun; 29(12):34-6, 38, 43-7. PubMed ID: 10287973
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Peer review of fees by physician groups: antitrust issues.
    Scott M
    Health Law Vigil; 1986 Jul; 9(14):5-8. PubMed ID: 10277308
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A tale of four cases: Patrick, Bolt, Mitchell, and Oltz.
    Chenen AR
    Med Staff Couns; 1989; 3(2):51-4. PubMed ID: 10292421
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Public hospitals and the Local Government Antitrust Act.
    Miles JJ
    Health Law Vigil; 1986 Feb; 9(4):3-4, 18. PubMed ID: 10275514
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Federal law offers protection for peer review.
    Holthaus D
    Hospitals; 1988 Jul; 62(13):46, 48. PubMed ID: 3384418
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Antitrust immunity in Colorado peer review actions.
    Earnest GL
    Hosp Law Newsl; 1989 Dec; 7(2):1-5. PubMed ID: 10296371
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Federal, state cooperation fosters antitrust probes.
    Burda D
    Mod Healthc; 1990 Apr; 20(14):50. PubMed ID: 10104143
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Oregon case raises questions about peer review.
    Davis CD
    Healthtexas; 1989 Jan; 44(7):7. PubMed ID: 10313055
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.