331 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11658727)
1. Consent to treatment--how informed is informed consent?
Brahams D
Med Leg J; 1984; 52(2):77-9. PubMed ID: 11658727
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Rogers v. Whitaker and informed consent in Australia: a fair dinkum duty of disclosure.
Chalmers D; Schwartz R
Med Law Rev; 1993; 1(2):139-59. PubMed ID: 11660490
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Family accuses doctors of failing to warn of risk.
Dyer C
BMJ; 1997 Apr; 314(7089):1224. PubMed ID: 11644924
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Consent to medical procedures: paternalism, self-determination or therapeutic alliance?
Teff H
Law Q Rev; 1985 Jul; 101():432-53. PubMed ID: 11658726
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Sidaway v. Bethlem Royal Hospital.
Great Britain. England. Court of Appeal, Civil Division
All Engl Law Rep; 1984 Feb; [1984] 1():1018-36. PubMed ID: 11648155
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The meaning of informed consent.
Whitfield A
Med Leg J; 1986; 54(1):11-25. PubMed ID: 11653740
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The surgeon's duty to warn of risks: transatlantic approach rejected by Court of Appeal.
Brahams D
Lancet; 1984 Mar; 1(8376):578-9. PubMed ID: 11644281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The Sidaway case.
Wells WT
Lancet; 1985 Mar; 1(8430):709. PubMed ID: 11644446
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A comparative study of the law relating to the physician's duty to obtain the patient's "informed consent" to medical treatment in England and California.
Churchward AB
Conn J Int Law; 1990; 5(2):483-563. PubMed ID: 11659375
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Beyond Bolam: responding to the patient.
Feenan DK
Med Law Int; 1994; 1(2):177-93. PubMed ID: 11653113
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Doctor's duty to inform patient of risk.
Times (Lond); 1984 Feb; ():24. PubMed ID: 11647764
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The patient's right to know -- a comparative view.
Giesen D; Hayes J
Anglo Am Law Rev; 1992; 21(2):101-22. PubMed ID: 11659667
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Hills v. Potter.
Great Britain. England. Queen's Bench Division
All Engl Law Rep; 1983 May; [1983] 3():716-29. PubMed ID: 11648156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Doctor's duty to answer patients' inquiries.
Brahams D
Lancet; 1987 Apr; 1(8538):932. PubMed ID: 11653070
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The doctrines of lack of consent and lack of informed consent in medical procedures in Louisiana.
Boland GL
LA Law Rev; 1983 Sep; 45(1):1-38. PubMed ID: 11658587
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Kelly v. Hazlett. 29 Jul 1976.
Ontario. High Court of Justice
Dom Law Rep; 1976; ():. PubMed ID: 12038305
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Logan v. Greenwich Hospital Association.
Connecticut. Supreme Court
Atl Report; 1983 Sep; 465():294-308. PubMed ID: 11648514
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Consent to medical treatment in Canada.
Picard EI
Osgoode Hall Law J; 1981 Mar; 19(1):140-51. PubMed ID: 11658624
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Medical risks, patients' rights, and the inadequacies of the negligence action.
Martin R
Hong Kong Law J; 1985 May; 15(2):150-66. PubMed ID: 11658882
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Reibl v. Hughes.
Canada. Supreme Court
Dom Law Rep; 1980 Oct; 114():1-35. PubMed ID: 12041068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
