210 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12041305)
1. Dixon v. Peters.
North Carolina. Court of Appeals
South East Report Second Ser; 1983 Sep; 306():477-84. PubMed ID: 12041305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A survey of North Carolina's treatment of the doctrine of informed consent.
Grubbs WG
Wake Forest Law Rev; 1986; 21(3):757-77. PubMed ID: 11658959
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Makas v. Hillhaven, Inc.
U.S. District Court, M.D. North Carolina, Greensboro Division
Fed Suppl; 1984 Jul; 589():736-43. PubMed ID: 11648211
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Butler v. Brown.
Georgia. Court of Appeals
South East Report Second Ser; 1982 Apr; 290():293-5. PubMed ID: 12041310
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Informed consent, termination of medical treatment, and the Federal Tort Claims Act: a new proposal for the military health care system.
Deardorff SE
Mil Law Rev; 1987 Jan; 115():1-120. PubMed ID: 11658904
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Hopp v. Lepp.
Canada. Supreme Court
Dom Law Rep; 1980 May; 112():67-83. PubMed ID: 12041085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Informing patients about medical risks.
Texas Medical Disclosure Panel
Tex Med; 1982 Mar; 78(3):36-9. PubMed ID: 11643732
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Logan v. Greenwich Hospital Association.
Connecticut. Supreme Court
Atl Report; 1983 Sep; 465():294-308. PubMed ID: 11648514
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Robinson v. Parrish.
U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Fed Report; 1983 Dec; 720():1548-52. PubMed ID: 11648163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Rush v. Miller.
U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Fed Report; 1981 May; 648():1075-6. PubMed ID: 11648166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.
U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Fed Report; 1991 Oct; 947():682-727. PubMed ID: 11648596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Informed consent in Texas: a proposal for reasonableness and predictability.
Wallach DM; Berry SJ
St Marys Law J; 1987 Nov; 18(3):835-82. PubMed ID: 11658921
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Informed consent.
Shaw A; Shaw IA
Semin Anesth; 1991 Sep; 10(3):180-6. PubMed ID: 11651357
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. North Carolina's Natural Death Act: confronting death with dignity.
Mitchell PR
Wake Forest Law Rev; 1978 Aug; 14(4):771-95. PubMed ID: 11661623
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Autonomy and privacy: protecting patients from their physicians.
Bobinski MA
Univ Pittsbg Law Rev; 1994; 55(2):291-388. PubMed ID: 11659957
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Informed consent and the material risk standard: a modest proposal.
Morton JE
Pac Law J; 1981 Jul; 12(4):915-36. PubMed ID: 11658351
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Informed consent: Alabama announces a new standard for determining proximate cause.
McFerrin JH
Cumberland Law Rev; 1986-1987; 17(2):519-32. PubMed ID: 11658966
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Informed consent in New York under the Medical Malpractice Insurance Act.
Rosen MW
Hofstra Law Rev; 1976; 4(3):701-27. PubMed ID: 11664598
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Halley v. Birbiglia.
Massachusetts. Supreme Judicial Court, Worcester
Mass Rep Mass Supreme Judic Court; 1983 Dec; 390():540-50. PubMed ID: 12041108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
