160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11127121)
1. Labeling liquid-based systems: FDA clarification.
Gutman S
J Reprod Med; 2000 Nov; 45(11):969-70. PubMed ID: 11127121
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparing liquid-based, thin-layer preparation devices.
Linder J
J Reprod Med; 2000 Nov; 45(11):966-8. PubMed ID: 11127119
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. New female condom clears FDA committee. Next for FDA review: package label and insert.
AIDS Alert; 2009 Apr; 24(4):42-4. PubMed ID: 19382364
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. FDA regulation on reprocessing single-use devices. The final word is in.
Health Devices; 2000 Oct; 29(10):371-3. PubMed ID: 11094777
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. FDA marketing claims, and the practitioner.
Runner S
J Evid Based Dent Pract; 2006 Mar; 6(1):19-23. PubMed ID: 17138391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The impact of FDA reform.
Trunzo J
Med Device Technol; 2003 Apr; 14(3):36-7. PubMed ID: 12789699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Labeling liquid-based systems: FDA clarification.
Gutman S
Acta Cytol; 2000; 44(6):1120. PubMed ID: 11127746
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The First Amendment and FDA restrictions on off-label uses: the call for a new approach.
Leghorn J; Brophy E; Rother P
Food Drug Law J; 2008; 63(2):391-406. PubMed ID: 18561466
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Clarification: 510k is premarket notification; it provides no patent or FDA approval.
Burkhart CG
J Drugs Dermatol; 2008 Feb; 7(2):105. PubMed ID: 18335644
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. A new era for the Pap test.
Holladay EB; Allen KA
JAAPA; 2001 Dec; 14(12):53-6. PubMed ID: 11824091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Premarket approval and federal preemption of product liability claims in the wake of Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr.
Jarcho DG
Food Drug Law J; 1996; 51(4):613-8. PubMed ID: 11797730
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. FDA begins product approval initiative.
Lewis C
FDA Consum; 2003; 37(3):10-1. PubMed ID: 12793386
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Medical device preemption after Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr.
Neraas MB
Food Drug Law J; 1996; 51(4):619-29. PubMed ID: 11797731
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Federal preemption of common law tort awards by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
Carrier MK
Food Drug Law J; 1996; 51(4):509-611. PubMed ID: 11797729
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Supplemental applications proposing labeling changes for approved drugs, biologics, and medical devices. Final rule.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS
Fed Regist; 2008 Aug; 73(164):49603-10. PubMed ID: 18958946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Old customs, ancient lore: the development of custom device law through neglect.
Klepinski RJ
Food Drug Law J; 2006; 61(2):237-49. PubMed ID: 16903030
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. FDA notifications. FC2 female condom receives FDA approval.
AIDS Alert; 2009 May; 24(5):58-9. PubMed ID: 19455720
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Product labeling: the FDA perspective.
Barlow DA
J Enterostomal Ther; 1986; 13(5):178-9. PubMed ID: 3639092
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Understanding pre-market approval and labeling differences of two leading customized ablation platforms: a call for reform at the FDA.
Wachler BS; Hiatt JA
J Refract Surg; 2004; 20(5):S588-92. PubMed ID: 15523980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The Food and Drug Administration's regulation of risk disclosure for implantable cardioverter defibrillators: has technology outpaced the Agency's regulatory framework?
Basile EM; Lorell BH
Food Drug Law J; 2006; 61(2):251-72. PubMed ID: 16903031
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
