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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10623123)

  • 1. How accurate is the data you send to JCAHO?
    Hosp Peer Rev; 1999 Nov; 24(11):171-3. PubMed ID: 10623123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Present comparative data effectively.
    Spath P
    Hosp Peer Rev; 2001 Mar; 26(3):34, 39-40. PubMed ID: 11246793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. ORYX data to play key role in new JCAHO survey process.
    Hosp Peer Rev; 2003 Jan; 28(1):1-3. PubMed ID: 12561296
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. What JCAHO says it's doing to address OIG's concerns.
    Hosp Peer Rev; 1999 Oct; 24(10):151. PubMed ID: 10621280
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Inspecting the inspectors: feds target JCAHO.
    Hosp Case Manag; 1997 Aug; 5(8):149-51. PubMed ID: 10169513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. OIG report spurs JCAHO changes in accreditation surveys, oversight.
    Hosp Peer Rev; 1999 Sep; 24(9):133-5. PubMed ID: 10558178
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. JCAHO to use ORYX data to detect sentinel events.
    Hosp Peer Rev; 1999 Dec; 24(12):182-3. PubMed ID: 10724619
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Data acquisition: the enigma of quality measurement.
    Spath PL
    Top Health Rec Manage; 1989 Dec; 10(2):1-11. PubMed ID: 10296240
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. ORYX data collection valuable but difficult and labor-intensive, some say.
    Hosp Peer Rev; 2001 Oct; 26(10):133-7. PubMed ID: 11586587
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. JCAHO, HCFA surveys inconsistent--GAO.
    Tokarski C
    Mod Healthc; 1990 Jun; 20(24):2. PubMed ID: 10105082
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Inspecting the inspectors: could JCAHO's deemed status face a threat?
    Hosp Peer Rev; 1997 Aug; 22(8):109-12. PubMed ID: 10169280
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A primer on JCAHO performance data.
    Data Strateg Benchmarks; 2002 Mar; 6(3):37-9. PubMed ID: 11951364
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Study slams Joint Commission's approach to measuring quality.
    Hosp Peer Rev; 2002 Mar; 27(3):29-32. PubMed ID: 11905382
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An update on JCAHO: what you need to know to prepare for your next survey.
    ED Manag; 1999 Jun; 11(6):61-7. PubMed ID: 10538067
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Safety profiles delayed by JCAHO but coming soon.
    Hosp Peer Rev; 2001 Oct; 26(10):137-8. PubMed ID: 11586588
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. ORYX data come to life in pre-survey reports.
    Jt Comm Perspect; 2000; 20(3):1, 3-4. PubMed ID: 11066743
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. JCAHO is adding numbers to inspection criteria.
    Manag Care Strateg; 1997 Jul; 5(7):75-6, 81. PubMed ID: 10176044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. ORYX: the next evolution in accreditation.
    Bender N
    Ambul Outreach; 1998; ():23-4. PubMed ID: 10346585
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. CMS and JCAHO quality measures now are the same: will that save you time?
    Hosp Peer Rev; 2004 Nov; 29(11):149-52. PubMed ID: 15558908
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. JCAHO sees mixed bag in OIG report criticizing some evaluation policies.
    Egger E
    Health Care Strateg Manage; 1999 Sep; 17(9):16-7. PubMed ID: 10621256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.