668 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19031664)
1. Achieving medical device safety in an era of globalization.
Meritz JK; White TL
Food Drug Law J; 2008; 63(3):647-55. PubMed ID: 19031664
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Trade, health or politics? Protectionism, risk assessment and the globalization of food safety.
Aginam O
Food Drug Law J; 2008; 63(3):665-72. PubMed ID: 19031666
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Casting a global safety net--a framework for food safety in the age of globalization.
Chyau J
Food Drug Law J; 2009; 64(2):313-34. PubMed ID: 19999287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Remarks delivered at the Food and Drug Law Institute's 48th Annual Conference.
Enzi MB
Food Drug Law J; 2005; 60(2):103-6. PubMed ID: 16097090
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
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. The impact of FDA reform.
Trunzo J
Med Device Technol; 2003 Apr; 14(3):36-7. PubMed ID: 12789699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Federal preemption of common law tort awards by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
Carrier MK
Food Drug Law J; 1996; 51(4):509-611. PubMed ID: 11797729
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Medical devices post-approval studies program: vision, strategies, challenges and opportunities.
Marinac-Dabic D; Bonhomme M; Loyo-Berrios N; Gross T; Ciperson R; Gardner S; Marcarelli M
Food Drug Law J; 2007; 62(3):597-604. PubMed ID: 17915402
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. License to maim: federal pre-emption and the Medical Device Amendments of 1976.
Petrella ME
Health Matrix Clevel; 1996; 6(2):349-89. PubMed ID: 10178392
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Technology: drug and device export reform.
Betz R
J Healthc Resour Manag; 1995 Oct; 13(10):30, 33. PubMed ID: 10151686
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Globalization of cosmetic regulations.
Blaschke JW
Food Drug Law J; 2005; 60(3):413-9. PubMed ID: 16304748
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. US and European postmarket clinical data requirements.
Donawa M
Med Device Technol; 2005 Mar; 16(2):19-21. PubMed ID: 15828495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The Food and Drug Administration's import alerts appear to be "misbranded".
Humphrey CM
Food Drug Law J; 2003; 58(4):595-612. PubMed ID: 15027452
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Who will hear? An examination of the regulation of hearing aids.
Adams SB
J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1995; 11(2):505-21. PubMed ID: 10143061
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
