144 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18260535)
1. Peer review puzzle. Supreme Court sidesteps appeal to keep records closed.
Blesch G
Mod Healthc; 2008 Jan; 38(2):17. PubMed ID: 18260535
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Peer-review showdown. High court review could lead to opening records.
Blesch G
Mod Healthc; 2007 Dec; 37(48):10. PubMed ID: 18203353
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. New ruling in NC affirms peer review privacy.
Hosp Peer Rev; 1999 Oct; 24(10):153-4. PubMed ID: 10621281
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Nevada Supreme Court wrestles with HCQIA immunity. Meyer v. Sunrise Hospital.
Hosp Law Newsl; 2002 Jan; 19(3):1-5. PubMed ID: 11771121
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Peer review: confidentiality and privilege.
Devlin MM
J Med Pract Manage; 2000; 16(3):165-8. PubMed ID: 11280209
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Courts beginning to address confidentiality of physicians' credentialing records.
Dawson JS
Healthspan; 1994 Jun; 11(6):3-5. PubMed ID: 10135152
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Peer review: confidentiality and privilege--Part Two.
Devlin MM
J Med Pract Manage; 2001; 16(5):261-3. PubMed ID: 11345885
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Hospital peer review is a kangaroo court.
Townend DW
Med Econ; 2000 Feb; 77(3):133-6, 141. PubMed ID: 10848200
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Evidentiary privilege for peer review documents rejected by the Fourth Circuit. Virmani v. Novant Health Inc.
Hosp Law Newsl; 2002 May; 19(7):6-8. PubMed ID: 11989437
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Setting aside differences. Lawyers, docs join forces on physicians' rights case.
Romano M
Mod Healthc; 2006 Jan; 36(4):16. PubMed ID: 16480101
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Developments in peer review.
Kinderman K
J Med Pract Manage; 2002; 17(5):251-3. PubMed ID: 12058695
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Protecting hospital records from discovery.
Ropiequet JL
Physician Exec; 1993; 19(2):35-8. PubMed ID: 10129389
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Protecting the confidentiality of peer review information.
McCann RW
J AHIMA; 1993 Dec; 64(12):52-6; quiz 57-8. PubMed ID: 10130489
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Antitrust protection extended to hospital authorities and physician peer review participants. Crosby v. Hospital Authority of Valdosta.
Roeder KH; Sledge SK
Ga Hosp Today; 1996 Nov; 40(11):3. PubMed ID: 10184649
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. State medical peer review: high cost but no benefit--is it time for a change?
Scheutzow SO
Am J Law Med; 1999; 25(1):7-60. PubMed ID: 10207570
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejects hospital's immunity claim. Cooper v. Delaware Valley Medical Center.
Hosp Law Newsl; 1995 Oct; 12(12):6-8. PubMed ID: 10184428
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Legal review: a case study from California--the sharing of peer review information between hospitals and nonhospital providers.
Brown LC
Top Health Inf Manage; 1994 May; 14(4):68-73. PubMed ID: 10134763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Divulging hospital records: need for access vs. confidentiality.
Bernstein AH
Hospitals; 1979 Apr; 53(7):51, 54, 58. PubMed ID: 761887
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. A tale of two doctors.
Hershey N
Hosp Law Newsl; 1995 Jan; 12(3):3-8. PubMed ID: 10139499
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Peer review and antitrust.
Sfikas PM
J Am Dent Assoc; 1997 Apr; 128(4):496-8. PubMed ID: 9103804
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
