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.
167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17763625)
1. Ongoing review: change of mindset is now needed. Hosp Peer Rev; 2007 Aug; 32(8):108-9. PubMed ID: 17763625 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. An analytical approach to improving physician performance. Sutter R; Waterman B; Udwin M Physician Exec; 2013; 39(3):26-36. PubMed ID: 23802385 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Bad medicine. Wiebe C New Physician; 1989; 38(1):24-9. PubMed ID: 10291944 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Grayzoning: does it protect patients--or bad doctors? Holoweiko M Med Econ; 1979 Feb; 56(4):186-8, 190, 193-4 passim. PubMed ID: 10247317 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. First steps toward peer review. Jurf JB; Haley KW; Keegan PL; Williams PA; Ecoff L J Nurs Staff Dev; 1992; 8(4):184-6. PubMed ID: 1517867 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Addressing problems of employee performance. McConnell CR Health Care Manag (Frederick); 2011; 30(2):185-92. PubMed ID: 21537142 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Medical staff: what should trigger a focused review? Hosp Peer Rev; 2007 Oct; 32(10):137-8, 143. PubMed ID: 17957881 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The physician's rights and responsibilities in the peer review process. Curtis T Med Staff Couns; 1987; 1(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 10284317 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Consultant appraisal. Davis JA QJM; 2001 Oct; 94(10):567-8. PubMed ID: 11588216 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The role of medical staff departments in peer review. Dimond FC QRC Advis; 1992 Jun; 8(8):6-8. PubMed ID: 10119299 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Does peer review mask legal risks? Strasshofer R J Leg Med (N Y); 1977 Mar; 5(3):9-14. PubMed ID: 300424 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The importance of hospital peer review. Board of Trustees, American Medical Association. QA Rev; 1991 Jul; 3(5):3. PubMed ID: 10114869 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Proper procedures are key to peer review legality experts say. Koska MT Hospitals; 1988 Jun; 62(12):65. PubMed ID: 3378775 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The impact of Patrick v. Burget on peer review. Gainer PS; Miles JJ Med Staff Couns; 1988; 2(4):13-21. PubMed ID: 10290181 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Preparing for appraisal: a guide for locum doctors. Turya EB BMJ; 2003 Sep; 327(7417):s97-8. PubMed ID: 14512500 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. How to obtain the data for medical staff standards. Hosp Peer Rev; 2007 Aug; 32(8):109-11. PubMed ID: 17763626 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Human resources. Bespoke take on a testing time. Pepe J Health Serv J; 2009 Nov; 119(6181):24. PubMed ID: 19972691 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Informal peer review actions: can they survive the Health Care Quality Improvement Act? Gleitz HG; Strickland NE Med Staff Couns; 1989; 3(3):25-31. PubMed ID: 10293721 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]