208 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16502529)
1. Seducing the medical profession.
N Y Times Web; 2006 Feb; ():A22. PubMed ID: 16502529
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Stanford to ban drug makers' gifts to doctors, even pens.
Pollack A
N Y Times Web; 2006 Sep; ():C2. PubMed ID: 16972375
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Physician-industry relations--will fewer gifts make a difference?
Steinbrook R
N Engl J Med; 2009 Feb; 360(6):557-9. PubMed ID: 19196671
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Doctors with ties to device makers.
N Y Times Web; 2005 Sep; ():A14. PubMed ID: 16231461
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Contact with pharmaceutical representatives: where does prudence lead?
Appelbaum PS
Am J Bioeth; 2010 Jan; 10(1):11-3. PubMed ID: 20077326
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Drug maker's efforts to compete in lucrative insulin market are under scrutiny.
Harris G; Pear R
N Y Times Web; 2006 Jan; ():A14. PubMed ID: 16453399
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The details are in the field.
Schwab AP
Am J Bioeth; 2010 Jan; 10(1):19-21. PubMed ID: 20077330
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Avoiding over-deterrence in managing physicians' relationships with industry.
Stell LK
Am J Bioeth; 2010 Jan; 10(1):27-9. PubMed ID: 20077334
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The pitfalls of misreading: what does "industry funding of medical education" actually say?
Spielman B
Am J Bioeth; 2010 Jan; 10(1):24-5. PubMed ID: 20077332
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. The AAMC exhibits the behavior it condemns.
Stossel TP
Am J Bioeth; 2010 Jan; 10(1):26-7. PubMed ID: 20077333
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Drug detailers, professionalism, and prudence.
Brody H
Am J Bioeth; 2010 Jan; 10(1):9-10. PubMed ID: 20077325
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The devil in the detail(ing).
Morreim H
Am J Bioeth; 2010 Jan; 10(1):15-7. PubMed ID: 20077328
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. In article, doctors back ban on drug companies' gifts; concerns cited on quality of patient care.
Harris G
N Y Times Web; 2006 Jan; ():A14. PubMed ID: 16450472
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The gift of drug samples.
Reid EE
Hastings Cent Rep; 2012; 42(2):49. PubMed ID: 22733332
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Huddle gets it right, most docs don't.
Rubin PH
Am J Bioeth; 2010 Jan; 10(1):17-9. PubMed ID: 20077329
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Drugs, devices and doctors.
Krugman P
N Y Times Web; 2005 Dec; ():A41. PubMed ID: 16450464
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Why academic medical centers should ban drug company gifts to individuals.
Strong C
Am J Bioeth; 2010 Jan; 10(1):13-5. PubMed ID: 20077327
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The physician and the pharmaceutical industry: both must keep the patient's interests at heart.
Ravindran GD
Issues Med Ethics; 1999; 7(1):21-2. PubMed ID: 16320467
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Response to open peer commentaries on "The pitfalls of deducing ethics from economics: why the Association of American Medical Colleges is wrong about pharmaceutical detailing".
Huddle TS
Am J Bioeth; 2010 Jan; 10(1):W1-3. PubMed ID: 20077322
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Inducements by Pharmaceutical Companies: The Elephant in the Room.
Soans ST
Indian Pediatr; 2018 Aug; 55(8):649-651. PubMed ID: 30218507
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
