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.
117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12438024)
1. Liability for failure to order screening examinations. Berlin L AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Dec; 179(6):1401-5. PubMed ID: 12438024 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. [Omission of mammography screening as a gross treatment error]. Wigge P Rofo; 2013 Nov; 185(11):1108-10. PubMed ID: 24150769 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Risk Management and Medico-Legal Issues in Breast Cancer. Ward CJ; Green VL Clin Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Jun; 59(2):439-46. PubMed ID: 27101242 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Contentious screening decisions: does the choice matter? Pauker SG; Kassirer JP N Engl J Med; 1997 Apr; 336(17):1243-4. PubMed ID: 9110913 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Legal Ramifications of Computer-Aided Detection in Mammography. Mezrich JL; Siegel EL J Am Coll Radiol; 2015 Jun; 12(6):572-4. PubMed ID: 25547380 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Breast cancer malpractice litigation in New York State. Mitnick JS; Vazquez MF; Plesser KP; Roses DF Radiology; 1993 Dec; 189(3):673-6. PubMed ID: 8234689 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Prostate specific antigen - useful screening tool or potential liability? Mahar P; Sengupta S; Ludlow K; Corcoran N Aust Fam Physician; 2010 Aug; 39(8):598-600. PubMed ID: 20877758 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A comparison of medical litigation filed against obstetrics and gynecology, internal medicine, and surgery departments. Hamasaki T; Hagihara A BMC Med Ethics; 2015 Oct; 16(1):72. PubMed ID: 26498823 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. FL: necessity of affidavit of medical experts: failure to file affidavit re nurses' malpractice fatal. Largie v Gregorian, 2005 WL 1631086 So2d -FL. Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2005 Jul; 46(2):3. PubMed ID: 16121962 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. A life-changing event. Palmer K Minn Med; 2005 Jun; 88(6):28-9. PubMed ID: 16050304 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The devastation caused by a decimal point. Johnson LJ Med Econ; 1999 Nov; 76(22):136, 143. PubMed ID: 10787708 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Use of mammography, Pap test and prostate examination by body mass index during the developmental period of cancer screening in Estonia. Tekkel M; Veideman T; Rahu M Public Health; 2011 Oct; 125(10):697-703. PubMed ID: 21907366 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Archive or Discard Computer-Aided Detection Markings: Two Schools of Thought. Berlin L J Am Coll Radiol; 2015 Nov; 12(11):1134-5. PubMed ID: 26541128 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Consequences of being accused of malpractice. Berlin L AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1997 Nov; 169(5):1219-23. PubMed ID: 9353431 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Small claim, big malpractice headache. Olah RP Med Econ; 1999 Apr; 76(8):109, 112, 115-6. PubMed ID: 10387826 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Liability when covering for another radiation oncologist. Berlin L AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1999 May; 172(5):1189-92. PubMed ID: 10227487 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of the legal risk of a 'missed' cancer in two breastscreen services. Osborne J; Lee W J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2010 Feb; 54(1):24-5. PubMed ID: 20377711 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Legal liability of the radiologist in missed breast cancer diagnosis]. Mortier M; Villeirs G JBR-BTR; 2003; 86(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 12693376 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]