214 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12856463)
21. Why the ERISA pre-emption is bad medicine.
Mayman GM; Stern JB
Cost Qual Q J; 1998 Mar; 4(1):7-11. PubMed ID: 10178962
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. Managed care: Texas's Health Care Liability Act held partially preempted by ERISA.
Hauswirth M
J Law Med Ethics; 1998; 26(3):249-50. PubMed ID: 11066883
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. The Supreme Court and managed-care liability.
Zinberg JM
N Engl J Med; 2005 Jan; 352(2):201-3; author reply 201-3. PubMed ID: 15651122
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. District court rules on Texas Health Care Liability Act.
Hansen E
Manag Care Interface; 1998 Nov; 11(11):87-8. PubMed ID: 10187421
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. The impact of the recent Supreme Court rulings in Pegram and Rush Prudential on state regulation of managed care organizations.
Trueman DL
J Health Law; 2003; 36(1):107-32. PubMed ID: 12784923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Implications of ERISA for health benefits and the number of self-funded ERISA plans.
Copeland C; Pierron B
EBRI Issue Brief; 1998 Jan; (193):1-26. PubMed ID: 10177290
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. The future of managed care: the debate continues.
Benjamin GC
Physician Exec; 1998; 24(3):67-9. PubMed ID: 10180980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Legal liability, denial of benefits and managed care.
Empey CS; Cwiek M
Mich Health Hosp; 1999; 35(5):30-1. PubMed ID: 10621029
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Crushing your health plan's legal protection.
Coleman DL
Bus Health; 1997 Aug; 15(8):40-2, 44-6. PubMed ID: 10170211
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Coverage decisions versus the quality of care: an analysis of recent ERISA judicial decisions and their implications for employer-insured individuals.
Rosenbaum S; Teitelbaum J
Issue Brief George Wash Univ Cent Health Serv Res Policy; 2000 Apr; (8):1-15. PubMed ID: 12426709
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. The circuitous journey to the Patients' Bill of Rights: winners and losers.
Reece S
Albany Law Rev; 2000-2001; 65(1):17-95. PubMed ID: 11949702
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Case law update. State law negligence actions against MCOs are pre-empted by ERISA.
West JC
J Healthc Risk Manag; 2004; 24(3):37-42. PubMed ID: 20196010
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Legal challenges to managed care: another view.
Hall MA
Health Aff (Millwood); 1999; 18(6):246-8. PubMed ID: 10650708
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Perspectives. Managed care consumers' law requires renegotiating ERISA.
Cunningham R
Faulkner Grays Med Health; 1997 Oct; 51(42):suppl 1-4. PubMed ID: 10175031
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Supreme Court clarifies the breadth of ERISA preemption.
Hershey N
Hosp Law Newsl; 2004 Oct; 21(12):1-7. PubMed ID: 15495741
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Employee Retirement Income Security Act and managed care: current issues and their impact on medical practice.
Weiss LD; Martinez JA; LeCesne BG
South Med J; 1999 Nov; 92(11):1049-53. PubMed ID: 10586829
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. ERISA. Employee Retirement Income Security Act.
Berlin L
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2000 Jan; 174(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 10628447
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. U.S. Supreme Court wades into ERISA one more time.
Roeder KH; Rees JS
GHA Today; 2004 Aug; 48(7):3, 9. PubMed ID: 15500273
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Employee health plan protections under ERISA. Employee Retirement Income Security Act.
Polzer K; Butler PA
Health Aff (Millwood); 1997; 16(5):93-102. PubMed ID: 9314679
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Managing the utilization of managed care (health care reform II).
Daigel GC
Manag Care Q; 1998; 6(4):47-51. PubMed ID: 10185778
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
