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.
2. From PSROs to PROs: regs are the next major step for the new peer review law. Rev Fed Am Hosp; 1982; 15(6):10-32. PubMed ID: 10273309 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Professional review and regulations. George JE; Quattrone MS; Phillips J N J Med; 1990 Dec; 87(12):983-6. PubMed ID: 2270152 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Rhode Island Supreme Court affirms limited nature of peer-review privilege. Kraus LM; Vernaglia LW Med Health R I; 2007 Jun; 90(6):187-8. PubMed ID: 17633592 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Legal issues in peer review for self-insured employers. Ragsdale JC Ala J Med Sci; 1985 Oct; 22(4):409-10. PubMed ID: 4073393 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The changing focus of peer review under Medicare. Mellette PM Spec Law Dig Health Care (Mon); 1986 Dec; 8(10):7-48. PubMed ID: 10301158 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Legal issues raised by private review activities of medical peer-review organizations. Hastings DA J Health Polit Policy Law; 1983; 8(2):293-313. PubMed ID: 6684668 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Supreme Court hits Oregon docs 1.95 million for anticompetitive behavior done in the name of peer review. Colo Med; 1988 Jul; 85(14):281-2. PubMed ID: 3168405 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Peer review: current law and policy problems. Hyman DA Healthspan; 1991; 8(7):3-10. PubMed ID: 10114029 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Utilization and quality control peer review organizations--a rose by any other name . . . ? Berg RN J Med Assoc Ga; 1982 Nov; 71(11):793-6. PubMed ID: 6890977 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Update: PSRO transmittal. Peer review by health care practitioners other than physicians. Rogers J Med Rec News; 1977 Apr; 48(2):45-51. PubMed ID: 10305612 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Antitrust's recent attack on the peer review practitioner: is the Health Care Quality Improvement Act a viable remedy? Rifkin AM; Evans GE; Hall GD Md Med J; 1990 Jan; 39(1):21-32. PubMed ID: 2308484 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The state of peer review in Delaware today. Battaglia VF Del Med J; 1988 Apr; 60(4):231-2, 237-9. PubMed ID: 3371511 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Letter: Peer review or federal peering? N Engl J Med; 1973 Nov; 289(19):1045-6. PubMed ID: 4795415 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. MSNJ Peer Review Organization Criteria Committee. Krosnick A J Med Soc N J; 1985 Mar; 82(3):194-5. PubMed ID: 3856683 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Commentary: The Peer Review Organization of New Jersey, Inc. Kingsley DI J Med Soc N J; 1985 Mar; 82(3):229-30. PubMed ID: 3856688 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Peer group review, an educational experience. Skipper JK; Mulligan JL; Garg ML; McNamara MJ Ohio State Med J; 1974 Aug; 70(8):488-90. PubMed ID: 4858610 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The evolving role of the American College of Surgeons in peer review and the PSRO legislation. Dunlop GR R I Med J; 1973 Aug; 56(8):329-32. PubMed ID: 4516956 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Peer review and protective laws in Pennsylvania. Gosfield AG; Gosfield GG Pa Med; 1979 Jun; 82(6):44-50. PubMed ID: 572526 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Peer reviewers are ready to sell your track record. Owens A Med Econ; 1984 Jun; 61(12):39-40, 44, 49. PubMed ID: 10273524 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]