543 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10324683)
1. Court upholds Blues' fee discounts.
Burda D
Mod Healthc; 1989 Sep; 19(35):3. PubMed ID: 10324683
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Blues' discount policy seen as antitrust issue.
Burda D
Hospitals; 1986 Nov; 60(21):36. PubMed ID: 3770662
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. "Blues interfered illegally with HMO.".
Burda D
Mod Healthc; 1987 Nov; 17(24):12. PubMed ID: 10284683
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Challenge to Blues' tax-exemption seen as signal to healthcare industry.
Anderson HJ; Baldwin MF
Mod Healthc; 1985 Dec; 15(25):18-20. PubMed ID: 10274654
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Court upholds Blues' policy on reimbursing psychologists.
Am Med News; 1979 May; 22(19):22. PubMed ID: 10242438
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. FTC eyes ban of M.D. input into HMOs, Blues.
Mod Healthc; 1979 Dec; 9(12):32. PubMed ID: 503022
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Ohio court upholds merger, finds bidding plan illegal.
Baker C
Health Law Vigil; 1985 Jun; 8(12):5-7. PubMed ID: 10272361
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. St. Francis Hospital takes on the Blues.
Haradine J
Mich Hosp; 1978 Mar; 14(3):21-2. PubMed ID: 10306418
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. The Insurance Bureau, the Blues and the prospective reimbursement system.
Cohn A
Mich Hosp; 1978 Aug; 14(8):8-11. PubMed ID: 10308444
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Va. report: drop special rules for Blues.
Natl Underwrit Life Health; 1978 Nov; 82(44):2, 26. PubMed ID: 10238875
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Legal challenges test relationships between Ohio hospitals, Blues plans.
Richman D
Mod Healthc; 1986 Jul; 16(14):74. PubMed ID: 10277194
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Reforming health care delivery: the Massachusetts Blues' role.
Getson J
Bus Health; 1987 Feb; 4(4):30-4. PubMed ID: 10280664
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Michigan law treats Blues plan like public agency, not private institution.
LaViolette S
Mod Healthc; 1981 Mar; 11(3):34, 36. PubMed ID: 10250327
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Blues' president foresees negotiated fee plan. Interview by Sari Staver.
McNerney WJ
Am Med News; 1981 Aug; 24(31):3, 19. PubMed ID: 10324158
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Medicare recoupment of alleged "overpayments".
Wilcox DP
Tex Med; 1987 Dec; 83(12):51-3. PubMed ID: 3321523
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. FTC eyes hospital-BC relations.
Simler SL
Mod Healthc; 1979 Jun; 9(6):28. PubMed ID: 440277
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Representative Hollister's interests center on health care legislation, reform.
Weddon W
Mich Med; 1979 Dec; 78(35):689-90. PubMed ID: 522678
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
