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.
212 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11478177)
1. Court to FP: the OR is off limits! Finger AL Med Econ; 2001 Jul; 78(13):72, 77, 83-4 passim. PubMed ID: 11478177 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Antitrust: hospitals may grant C-section privileges only to obstetricians. Romanow K J Law Med Ethics; 2001; 29(1):111-2. PubMed ID: 11521265 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Government-funded hospital may require physician to accept indigent patients. Regan WA Hosp Prog; 1984 Jan; 65(1):58. PubMed ID: 10264663 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. FPs vs. OBGs: a battle over babies. Holoweiko M Med Econ; 1979 Jun; 56(13):129-30, 132, 135. PubMed ID: 10242267 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Ob-gyn staff quits in battle over surgical turf. Med World News; 1979 Oct; 20(20):6, 11. PubMed ID: 10243637 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Letters from the front: testimony on behalf of OB privileges for family physicians. Rodney WM Fam Med; 1993 Oct; 25(9):563-5. PubMed ID: 8243900 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Our hospital's competitive zeal almost buried us. Copeland LR Med Econ; 1989 May; 66(10):233, 237, 241. PubMed ID: 10293376 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Physician credentialing: limited judicial review of credentialing decision disallowed. Crete EE J Law Med Ethics; 2004; 32(2):369-71. PubMed ID: 15301202 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Court upholds law's immunities in peer review cases. Kadzielski MA Health Prog; 1990; 71(6):21, 31. PubMed ID: 10105569 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Childbearing and women's choice of nurse-midwives in Washington, D.C. hospitals. Langton PA; Kammerer DA Women Health; 1989; 15(2):49-65. PubMed ID: 2781810 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. An FP wins a harrowing battle in the obstetrics turf war. Finger AL Med Econ; 1997 Aug; 74(17):116-8, 121-3, 128-30. PubMed ID: 10169582 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The Lourdes Hospital inquiry: its implications for medical practice. Murphy JF Ir Med J; 2006 Mar; 99(3):68-9. PubMed ID: 16700254 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Court blocks discovery of application for medical staff privileges. Alexander v. Superior Court (Saheb). Hosp Law Newsl; 1994 Mar; 11(5):8. PubMed ID: 10184047 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Federal court limits federal antitrust jurisdiction over medical staff decisions. Christensen JD Health Law Vigil; 1984 Jan; 7(1):12-4. PubMed ID: 10264312 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]