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.
220 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11660490)
1. 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]
2. Beyond Bolam: responding to the patient. Feenan DK Med Law Int; 1994; 1(2):177-93. PubMed ID: 11653113 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
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. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. The meaning of informed consent. Whitfield A Med Leg J; 1986; 54(1):11-25. PubMed ID: 11653740 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Rogers v. Whitaker. Australia. High Court Aust Law J; 1993 Jan; 67(1):47-55. PubMed ID: 11648609 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
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. Doctor's duty to answer patients' inquiries. Brahams D Lancet; 1987 Apr; 1(8538):932. PubMed ID: 11653070 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Doctor's duty to inform patient of risk. Times (Lond); 1984 Feb; ():24. PubMed ID: 11647764 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Why the British courts rejected the American doctrine of informed consent (and what British physicians should do about it). Annas GJ Am J Public Health; 1984 Nov; 74(11):1286-8. PubMed ID: 6496827 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Castell v. De Greef. South Africa. Supreme Court, Cape Provincial Division S Afr Law Rep; 1994 Feb; 1994(4):408-41. PubMed ID: 12041097 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Medical malpractice: informed consent cases in "full-disclosure" jurisdictions. Seidelson DE Duquesne Law Rev; 1976; 14(3):309-47. PubMed ID: 11664631 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Emerging trends in the physician's duty to disclose: an update of Canterbury v. Spence. Knapp TA; Huff RL J Leg Med (N Y); 1975 Jan; 3(1):31-5. PubMed ID: 11643353 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]