260 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18596278)
1. Medical-device safety and the FDA.
Schultz DG
N Engl J Med; 2008 Jul; 359(1):88-9; author reply 89. PubMed ID: 18596278
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Semper fidelis--consumer protection for patients with implanted medical devices.
Maisel WH
N Engl J Med; 2008 Mar; 358(10):985-7. PubMed ID: 18322280
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The Food and Drug Administration's regulation of risk disclosure for implantable cardioverter defibrillators: has technology outpaced the Agency's regulatory framework?
Basile EM; Lorell BH
Food Drug Law J; 2006; 61(2):251-72. PubMed ID: 16903031
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Medical device preemption after Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr.
Neraas MB
Food Drug Law J; 1996; 51(4):619-29. PubMed ID: 11797731
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Who should protect the public? The Supreme Court and medical device regulation.
Korobkin R
N Engl J Med; 2007 Oct; 357(17):1680-1. PubMed ID: 17960010
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Postmarket surveillance. Final rule.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS
Fed Regist; 2002 Jun; 67(109):38878-92. PubMed ID: 12053947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Premarket approval and federal preemption of product liability claims in the wake of Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr.
Jarcho DG
Food Drug Law J; 1996; 51(4):613-8. PubMed ID: 11797730
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The impact of FDA reform.
Trunzo J
Med Device Technol; 2003 Apr; 14(3):36-7. PubMed ID: 12789699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The controversy over Guidant's implantable defibrillators.
Steinbrook R
N Engl J Med; 2005 Jul; 353(3):221-4. PubMed ID: 16034006
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. New type of defibrillator.
FDA Consum; 2002; 36(4):7. PubMed ID: 12184312
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Pin the tail on the other donkey: allocating and avoiding injury losses after drug or device approval.
O'Reilly JT
Food Drug Law J; 2007; 62(3):559-72. PubMed ID: 17915397
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. FDA issues final medical device reporting regulation.
Healthc Hazard Mater Manage; 1996 Feb; 9(5):5-6. PubMed ID: 10154800
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Medical device recall authority--FDA. Final rule.
Fed Regist; 1996 Nov; 61(225):59004-22. PubMed ID: 10163116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Legal overprotection.
Friedman JH
Med Health R I; 2004 Oct; 87(10):294. PubMed ID: 15559378
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The FDA defense: a prescription for easing the pain of punitive damage awards in medical products liability cases.
Marthaler AL
Spec Law Dig Health Care Law; 1997 Sep; (223):9-45. PubMed ID: 10173273
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The Feds do it again. The EMS community grows wary--and weary--of FDA intervention.
Nordberg M
Emerg Med Serv; 1995 Mar; 24(3):40-52. PubMed ID: 10140757
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. 'Six-pack abs' electronically?
FDA Consum; 2002; 36(4):25-6. PubMed ID: 12184299
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Medical device reporting: manufacturer reporting, importer reporting, user facility reporting, distributor reporting. Food and Drug Administration, HHS. Final rule.
Fed Regist; 2000 Jan; 65(17):4112-21. PubMed ID: 11010653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. How do regulatory agencies ensure the release of a safe medical device?
Haggar B
Clin Perform Qual Health Care; 1999; 7(2):100-3. PubMed ID: 10747561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. An overview of FDA medical device regulation as it relates to deep brain stimulation devices.
Peña C; Bowsher K; Costello A; De Luca R; Doll S; Li K; Schroeder M; Stevens T
IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng; 2007 Sep; 15(3):421-4. PubMed ID: 17894274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
