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.
109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1035591)
61. Professional Standards Review Organizations (PSROs). Winterfeldt E J Am Diet Assoc; 1974 Dec; 65(6):654-6. PubMed ID: 4475053 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
62. What 1,000 family doctors think about--the PSRO situation. D'Amelio N Med Times; 1974 Jul; 102(7):102 passim. PubMed ID: 4858620 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
63. Letter: Canadian Council on Hospital Accreditation. Karnauchow PN Can Med Assoc J; 1974 Aug; 111(3):215 passim. PubMed ID: 4859383 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
64. VA hires outside firm to review its medical care systemwide. Weissenstein E Mod Healthc; 1992 May; 22(18):10. PubMed ID: 10117588 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
65. Bivens actions not allowed against peer review organizations. Margolis RE Healthspan; 1994 Feb; 11(2):17-8. PubMed ID: 10132989 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
66. [Medical audit in the United States: a model for medical review in out country? Report of a study trip]. Casparie AF Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1977 Apr; 121(16):684-8. PubMed ID: 854113 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
67. The evolving role of the American College of Surgeons in peer review and the PSRO legislation. Dunlop GR R I Med J; 1973 Aug; 56(8):329-32. PubMed ID: 4516956 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
68. Criteria and all that. Fielding JE Pediatrics; 1976 Apr; 57(4):439-41. PubMed ID: 944414 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
69. Peer review. A study commissioned by the Federal Council of the Australian Medical Association of peer review systems in the United States of America, Canada and West Germany. Wilson LL; Larkins N Med J Aust; 1977 Apr; 1(SP2):7-24. PubMed ID: 559234 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
70. What makes Uncle Sammy run--and Oz, too? Aust Nurses J; 1978 Oct; 8(4):5. PubMed ID: 251431 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
72. [The evaluation of quality of care]. Roger FH Acta Clin Belg; 1988; 43(3):219-30. PubMed ID: 3137760 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
73. A challenge: can physicians continue to control the review of medical services? Sohmer MF; Bass CM N C Med J; 1978 May; 39(5):295-6. PubMed ID: 275556 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
74. The controversy over audit methodologies. Ainsworth TH Hosp Med Staff; 1976 Jul; 5(7):28-30. PubMed ID: 1022750 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
76. New format for audit criteria from the City of Memphis Hospital. Rosenberg EW; Laurenzo GD J Tenn Med Assoc; 1976 Jul; 69(7):483-5. PubMed ID: 945432 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
77. Medical audit. Freeman Z Med J Aust; 1976 Jul; 2(2):75-6. PubMed ID: 988469 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
78. The irrelevance to truth of majority opinion and authority. A perspective on peer review systems. J Natl Med Assoc; 1973 Jul; 65(4):340-2. PubMed ID: 4738034 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]