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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14621515)

  • 1. Was fundal pressure by nurses during birth cause of brain damage? Case on point: Martinez v. Northridge Hospital Medical Ctr., 2003 WL 22234957-CA.
    Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2003 Oct; 44(5):2. PubMed ID: 14621515
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Nurses fail to object to Dr.'s mid-forceps delivery. Daniels v Durham County Hospital Corp.
    Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2005 Sep; 46(4):2. PubMed ID: 16238174
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Evaluation of the condition of newborn infants delivered by obstetrical forceps and vacuum extraction].
    Gajewska E; Wachnik D; Orlik-Adamska S
    Ginekol Pol; 1985 Feb; 56(2):110-4. PubMed ID: 4043787
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Delivering the verdict.
    Nursing; 2003 Dec; 33(12):28. PubMed ID: 14708540
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Was there sufficient nurse expert testimony to go to a jury? Case on point: Nichols v. Good Samaritan Hospital, 2004 WL 2222384 -CA.
    Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2004 Oct; 45(5):2. PubMed ID: 15559717
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Nurses fail to timely respond: uterus ruptures--neurological injuries. Case on point: Howerton v. Mary Immaculate Hosp., 2002 WL 1269344 S.E.2d.-VA.
    Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2002 Jun; 43(1):2. PubMed ID: 12154444
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Nurses' negligence explored by California court. Nichols v. Good Samaritan Hospital.
    Hosp Law Newsl; 2005 Sep; 22(11):5-6. PubMed ID: 16130833
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Immediate and remote outcome of vacuum extraction and use of obstetrical forceps].
    Mishina EA; Penchenko EV
    Akush Ginekol (Mosk); 1975 May; (5):72. PubMed ID: 1220579
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. RN removed FHR monitor to make room: $3.8 million verdict. CASE ON POINT: Long v. Wader, 2007 ALSC 1041887--08/31/07) So.2d-AL.
    Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2008 Jan; 48(8):2. PubMed ID: 18330376
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Should nurse have called 'on-call' obstetrician stat? Case on point: Garhart v. Columbia/HealthONE, L.L.C., 2004 WL 1433331 P.2d -CO.
    Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2004 Jul; 45(2):2. PubMed ID: 15382493
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Birth-injury litigation.
    Lancet; 1978 Dec 23-30; 2(8104-5):1349. PubMed ID: 82847
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 'Equitable contribution' doctrine does not apply to RN's insurer. Case on point: Am. Continental Ins. Co. v. Am. Casualty Co., 103 Cal. Rptr. 2d 63-CA (2001).
    Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2001 Feb; 41(9):2. PubMed ID: 11995082
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. "Asleep on duty" record impacts delay in delivery case. Case in point: St. Paul Medical Center v. Cecil (842 S.W.2d 808--TX [1992]).
    Tammelleo AD
    Regan Rep Nurs Law; 1993 Mar; 33(10):2. PubMed ID: 8493317
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The use of the vacuum extractor.
    Bird GC
    Clin Obstet Gynaecol; 1982 Dec; 9(3):641-61. PubMed ID: 6756751
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Legal aspects in obstetrics and possible sequelae].
    Spann W
    Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd; 1987 Jan; 47(1):69-70. PubMed ID: 3569833
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. CA: nurses may have been negligent in delay: nurses' negligence not cause of patient's death. Arguelles v. Seton Medical Center, 2005 WL 2375628 -CA.
    Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2005 Oct; 46(5):3. PubMed ID: 16315362
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Reversible error results in new trial for RN. Case on point: Winter v. Henderson, A-215-10T3 NJSUP (2/22/2012)-NJ.
    Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2012 May; 52(12):2. PubMed ID: 22679663
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. MN: Did nurses fail to timely call for help?: Court reversed summary judgment for hospital. Kuhne v. Allina Health Systems, A-09-1826 MNCA(6/15/2010)-MN.
    Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2010 Aug; 51(3):3. PubMed ID: 21090543
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Nurse-expert fails to 'go to bat' in testifying for plaintiffs. Case on point: Ross v. Redding Medical Center, 2003 WL 21246105-CA.
    Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2003 Jun; 44(1):4. PubMed ID: 12886709
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Surgeon attempts to blame nurses for sponge left in mastectomy patient. Case on point: Mitchell v. Baylor Univ. Med. Ctr., 2003 WL 21508493 S.W.3d-TX.
    Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2003 Aug; 44(3):2. PubMed ID: 14508919
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.