134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12085919)
1. Pap smears: physicians must disclose risk of refusal.
Annas GJ
Nurs Law Ethics; 1981 Jan; 2(1):3. PubMed ID: 12085919
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. California Supreme Court expands the informed consent doctine; physicians have a duty to obtain an informed refusal: Truman v. Thomas.
Cluff CA
Brigh Young Univ Law Rev; 1980; 1980(4):933-47. PubMed ID: 11655722
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Informed refusal: an unnecessary burden on physicians?
Shank S
UMKC Law Rev; 1981; 49(3):365-76. PubMed ID: 11658619
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Pap smears, prevention, primary care, and the guarantee of good health.
Curran WJ
Am J Public Health; 1981 Jun; 71(6):646-7. PubMed ID: 7235107
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. From informed consent to a duty to convince: Truman v. Thomas.
Beller RL
Houst Law Rev; 1981 May; 18(4):917-30. PubMed ID: 11649420
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Informed consent: from disclosure to patient participation in medical decisionmaking.
Simpson RE
Northwest Univ Law Rev; 1981 Mar; 76(1):172-207. PubMed ID: 11658361
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Informed dissent: a new corollary to the informed consent doctrine?
Friedman DA
Chic Kent Law Rev; 1981; 57(4):1119-44. PubMed ID: 11658347
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Truman v. Thomas. 9 Jun 1980.
California. Supreme Court
Wests Calif Report; 1980; 165():308-18. PubMed ID: 11645975
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. The two schools of thought and informed consent doctrines in Pennsylvania: a model for integration.
Dailey JP
Dickinson Law Rev; 1994; 98(4):713-37. PubMed ID: 11656548
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Public psychiatry and the right to refuse treatment: toward an effective damage remedy.
Furrow BR
Harv Civ Rights-Civil Lib Law Rev; 1984; 19(1):21-60. PubMed ID: 11658667
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Truman v. Thomas.
California. Court of Appeal, Third District
Wests Calif Report; 1979 May; 155():752-63. PubMed ID: 11648446
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The doctrine of informed consent: protecting the patient's right to make informed health care decisions.
Studer MR
Mont Law Rev; 1987; 48(1):85-100. PubMed ID: 11658939
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Cancer nursing and the law: informed refusal. Part IV.
Gargaro WJ
Cancer Nurs; 1980 Dec; 3(6):467-8. PubMed ID: 6903480
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Tort--informed consent--new directions for medical disclosure--Hopp v. Lepp and Reibl v. Hughes.
Gochnauer M; Fleming DJ
Univ B C Law Rev; 1981; 15(2):475-97. PubMed ID: 11658641
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Recent developments in medical negligence.
Quest IM
Int J Med Law; 1980; 1(4):483-91. PubMed ID: 11649434
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Informed consent for the terminal patient.
Rutledge TA
Bayl Law Rev; 1975; 27(1):111-21. PubMed ID: 11660876
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
