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 *

148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18807793)

  • 1. Selim v Lele and the civil (industrial) conscription prohibition: constitutional protection against federal legislation controlling or privatising Australian public hospitals.
    Faunce T
    J Law Med; 2008 Aug; 16(1):36-48. PubMed ID: 18807793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Constitutional limits on federal legislation practically compelling medical employment: Wong v Commonwealth; Selim v Professional Services Review Committee.
    Faunce T
    J Law Med; 2009 Oct; 17(2):196-205. PubMed ID: 19998589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Commissions of audit in Australia: health system privatisation directives and civil conscription protections.
    Colton C; Faunce T
    J Law Med; 2014 Mar; 21(3):561-71. PubMed ID: 24804528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Government control over health-related not-for-profit organisations: Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International Inc 570 US_(2013).
    Vines T; Donohoo AM; Faunce T
    J Law Med; 2013 Dec; 21(2):278-93. PubMed ID: 24597375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Corporatisation of Community Pharmacy and the Constitutional Prohibition of Civil Conscription for Medical Service Providers.
    Yazidjoglou C; Faunce T
    J Law Med; 2016; 24(1):41-60. PubMed ID: 30136773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The modernization of American public law: health care reform and popular constitutionalism.
    Super DA
    Stanford Law Rev; 2014 Apr; 66(4):873-952. PubMed ID: 24834539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Baby doe redux? The Department of Health and Human Services and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002: a cautionary note on normative neonatal practice.
    Sayeed SA
    Pediatrics; 2005 Oct; 116(4):e576-85. PubMed ID: 16199687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Administrative "health courts" for medical injury claims: the federal constitutional issues.
    Elliott ED; Narayan SA; Nasmith MS
    J Health Polit Policy Law; 2008 Aug; 33(4):761-98. PubMed ID: 18617674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Abortion: rights or technicalities? A comparison of Roe v. Wade with the abortion decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court.
    Brown HO
    Hum Life Rev; 1975; 1(3):60-74. PubMed ID: 11662181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Abortion, conscience and the Constitution: an examination of federal institutional conscience clauses.
    Pilpel HF; Patton DE
    Columbia Human Rights Law Rev; 1974 Fall-1975 Winter; 6(2):279-305. PubMed ID: 11663597
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Tucson Woman's Clinic v. Eden.
    United States. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
    Wests Fed Rep; 2004; 379():531-57. PubMed ID: 16477726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Legal aspects of abortion practice.
    Goldman EB
    Clin Obstet Gynaecol; 1986 Mar; 13(1):135-43. PubMed ID: 3709009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Kevorkian v. Arnett.
    United States. District Court. Central District Court of California
    Wests Fed Suppl; 1996; 939():725-32. PubMed ID: 16320472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Consequences of the judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court on the fighting dog problem].
    Hülsenbusch M
    Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr; 2005 Mar; 112(3):98-9. PubMed ID: 15847070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman.
    U.S. Supreme Court
    U S Rep U S Supreme Court; 1984 Jan; 465():89-167. PubMed ID: 12041274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Owens v. Storehouse, Inc.
    U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
    Fed Report; 1993 Feb; 984():394-401. PubMed ID: 11648231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Fischer v. Department of Public Welfare.
    Pennsylvania. Commonwealth Court
    Atl Report; 1984 Sep; 482():1148-62. PubMed ID: 11648341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. State legislation on abortion after Roe v. Wade: selected constitutional issues.
    Bryant MD
    Am J Law Med; 1976; 2(1):101-32. PubMed ID: 973625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. MYRIAD VOICES AGAINST GENE PATENTS IN THE HIGH COURT.
    McCallum L; Faunce T
    J Law Med; 2015 Dec; 23(2):322-9. PubMed ID: 26939499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Doe v. Attorney General of the United States.
    U.S. District Court, N.D. California
    Fed Suppl; 1989 Aug; 723():452-7. PubMed ID: 11648247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.