120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20010016)
1. Better to receive than to give? Interorganizational service arrangements and hospital performance.
Trinh HQ; Begun JW; Luke RD
Health Care Manage Rev; 2010; 35(1):88-97. PubMed ID: 20010016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Economic and legal implications of multi-institutional arrangements.
Warren BG
Hosp Admin Curr; 1981; 25(4):19-24. PubMed ID: 10253427
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Satelliting: one kitchen, less waste.
Rothschild M
Healthc Foodserv; 1995; 5(4):14-5. PubMed ID: 10152491
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Better data. Premier's new service will let systems compare themselves against specific foes.
Morrissey J
Mod Healthc; 1997 Jul; 27(27):43. PubMed ID: 10168804
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Novant moves for market share in N.C.
Kirchheimer B
Mod Healthc; 1999 Mar; 29(11):20. PubMed ID: 10346362
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Hospitals leave national GPOs to create their own competitive contracts.
Health Care Cost Reengineering Rep; 1999 Oct; 4(10):150-2. PubMed ID: 10662118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The layered look.
Hopping J
Health Syst Rev; 1997; 30(3):24-5. PubMed ID: 10168603
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. What are we going to do with all our surplus capacity?
Hayward C
Health Care Strateg Manage; 1998 Mar; 16(3):1, 20-3. PubMed ID: 10177101
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Hospitals must consider antitrust implications of multi-institutional arrangements.
Kopit WG; Gerson SM; Moses RJ
Hospitals; 1982 Mar; 56(5):82-4. PubMed ID: 7056538
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Keeping hospitals healthy: focus centers translate into greater net revenue.
Pratt WR
Hosp Top; 2008; 86(2):13-19. PubMed ID: 18450558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Collaborating with competitors for healthier communities.
Zablocki E
Health Syst Lead; 1996 Dec; 3(10):4-12. PubMed ID: 10163193
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Competition presents opportunity for not-for-profit systems.
Johnson RL
Health Prog; 1984 Nov; 65(10):31-5, 60. PubMed ID: 10268692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Sharp uses integrated approach to stay profitably at-risk.
Capitation Manag Rep; 2005 Dec; 12(12):133-6. PubMed ID: 16515146
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Joint venture versus outreach: a financial analysis of case studies.
Forsman RW
Clin Leadersh Manag Rev; 2001; 15(4):217-21. PubMed ID: 11490651
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Multi-institutional systems: promise and performance.
Zuckerman HS
Inquiry; 1979; 16(4):291-314. PubMed ID: 162052
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The efficiency of hospital-based clusters: evaluating system performance using data envelopment analysis.
Sikka V; Luke RD; Ozcan YA
Health Care Manage Rev; 2009; 34(3):251-61. PubMed ID: 19625830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Think globally, manage locally.
Coile RC
Health Syst Rev; 1997; 30(3):20-3. PubMed ID: 10168602
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Multi-institutional arrangements: shared service programs are on the rise.
Wegmiller DC
Hospitals; 1980 Apr; 54(7):147-50. PubMed ID: 7358354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Mining revenue cycle opportunities in health-system-based medical practices.
Lewins G; Chapdelaine JM
Healthc Financ Manage; 2007 Sep; 61(9):104-8, 110, 112 passim. PubMed ID: 17937126
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. AHERF revisited. Pittsburgh, Philly markets continue recovery from the system's bankruptcy, but scars remain.
Becker C
Mod Healthc; 2005 Jun; 35(26):40-1, 44, 46. PubMed ID: 16001497
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
