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 *

163 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2294040)

  • 1. Oregon responds to physicians' fears of peer review.
    Koska MT
    Hospitals; 1990 Jan; 64(1):70-1. PubMed ID: 2294040
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Peer review, privileges: MDs fear legal tangles.
    Koska MT
    Hospitals; 1989 Dec; 63(23):28-9, 31, 33. PubMed ID: 2583696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Peer review after Patrick.
    Bierig J
    J Health Hosp Law; 1988 Jun; 21(6):135-9. PubMed ID: 10287912
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Peer review in the wake of Patrick.
    McCormick B
    Trustee; 1988 Jul; 41(7):17. PubMed ID: 10288090
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The Patrick case: will it hinder peer review?
    Holthaus D
    Hospitals; 1988 Jun; 62(12):56. PubMed ID: 3378770
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Peer review: Patrick redux.
    Cohen HH
    Med Staff Couns; 1990; 4(1):59-63. PubMed ID: 10104770
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Antitrust law and the medical staff.
    Holthaus D
    Trustee; 1988 Jul; 41(7):23. PubMed ID: 10288093
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Peer review immunity after Patrick v. Burget.
    Kelly JP
    Healthspan; 1988 Jun; 5(6):2-5. PubMed ID: 10288658
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Staff privileges--$2 million antitrust judgment reversed.
    Carlson DR
    Health Law Vigil; 1986 Oct; 9(21):1-4. PubMed ID: 10284024
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Medical peer review under legal knife.
    Kosterlitz J
    Natl J (Wash); 1988 Mar; 20(13):820. PubMed ID: 10286588
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Antitrust and hospital peer review.
    Blumstein JF; Sloan FA
    Law Contemp Probl; 1988; 51(2):7-92. PubMed ID: 10295966
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Supreme Court decides Patrick; peer review alive and well despite ruling.
    Christensen JD
    Health Law Vigil; 1988 Jun; 11(13):1-5. PubMed ID: 10287418
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Perspectives. The Patrick case: implications for peer review.
    Mcgraw Hills Med Health; 1988 May; 42(22):suppl 4 p.. PubMed ID: 10287491
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Patrick v. Burget; will the state action doctrine protect bad faith peer review?
    Healthspan; 1988 Feb; 5(2):20-2. PubMed ID: 10288650
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. High court's override on Patrick renews concerns about peer review risk.
    Halper HR; Kazon PM
    Bus Health; 1988 Jul; 5(9):40-1. PubMed ID: 10288490
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Antitrust. Is quality review in jeopardy?
    Pollner F
    Med World News; 1988 Jun; 29(12):34-6, 38, 43-7. PubMed ID: 10287973
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Antitrust immunity in Colorado peer review actions.
    Earnest GL
    Hosp Law Newsl; 1989 Dec; 7(2):1-5. PubMed ID: 10296371
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Medical staff peer review and federal antitrust scrutiny.
    LaCava FW
    Bull Am Coll Surg; 1985 Aug; 70(8):40-1. PubMed ID: 10272117
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A tale of four cases: Patrick, Bolt, Mitchell, and Oltz.
    Chenen AR
    Med Staff Couns; 1989; 3(2):51-4. PubMed ID: 10292421
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Peer review, privileges: MDs fear legal tangles.
    Koska MT
    Trustee; 1990 Feb; 43(2):19. PubMed ID: 10104264
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.