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 *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23075183)

  • 1. Legislative interference with the patient-physician relationship.
    Weinberger SE; Lawrence HC; Henley DE; Alden ER; Hoyt DB
    N Engl J Med; 2012 Oct; 367(16):1557-9. PubMed ID: 23075183
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Separation of health, state. Recent legislation has providers caught in the debate over government involvement in personal medical decisions.
    Romano M
    Mod Healthc; 2003 Oct; 33(43):4-5, 12, 1. PubMed ID: 14626601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Physician assistant as abortion provider: lessons from Vermont, New York, and Montana.
    Schirmer JT
    Hastings Law J; 1997 Nov; 49(1):253-88. PubMed ID: 14758819
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Physician gag clauses--the hypocrisy of the Hippocratic Oath.
    Swanson DS
    South Ill Univ Law J; 1997; 21():313-34. PubMed ID: 16086489
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Bargaining with Hippocrates: managed care and the doctor-patient relationship.
    Hall TS
    S C Law Rev; 2003; 54(3):689-740. PubMed ID: 15214354
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Playing politics with the doctor-patient relationship.
    Oyer DJ
    N Engl J Med; 2012 Jun; 366(24):2326-7. PubMed ID: 22694016
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Inserting government between patient and physician.
    Drazen JM
    N Engl J Med; 2004 Jan; 350(2):178-9. PubMed ID: 14711917
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The two faces of gag provisions: patients and physicians in a bind.
    Brand GS; Munoz GM; Nichols MG; Okata MU; Pitt JB; Seager S
    Yale Law Policy Rev; 1998; 17():249-80. PubMed ID: 16437824
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Partial-birth abortion, Congress, and the Constitution.
    Annas GJ
    N Engl J Med; 1998 Jul; 339(4):279-83. PubMed ID: 9673308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Health care law.
    Mayo TW
    SMU Law Rev; 2002; 55(3):1113-53. PubMed ID: 12136884
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Can Congress settle the abortion issue?
    Segers MC
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1982 Jun; 12(3):20-8. PubMed ID: 7107237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Lost in a doctrinal wasteland: the exceptionalism of doctor-patient speech within the Rehnquist Court's First Amendment jurisprudence.
    Berg PE
    Health Matrix Clevel; 1998; 8(2):153-77. PubMed ID: 10182216
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A forced choice: the value of requiring advance directives.
    Abbo ED; Volandes AE
    J Clin Ethics; 2008; 19(2):127-40. PubMed ID: 18767473
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. South Dakota's abortion script--threatening the physician-patient relationship.
    Lazzarini Z
    N Engl J Med; 2008 Nov; 359(21):2189-91. PubMed ID: 19020321
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Medical groups voice doubts over changes to gun background checks.
    McCarthy M
    BMJ; 2013 Jun; 346():f3941. PubMed ID: 23775858
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. On the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2000.
    Arkes H
    Hum Life Rev; 2000; 26(4):15-26. PubMed ID: 12530369
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Casey reflections.
    Cavendish EA
    Am Univ J Gend Soc Policy Law; 2002; 10(2):305-14. PubMed ID: 16526134
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Consti-tortion: tort law as an end-run around abortion rights after Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
    Stone AJ
    Am Univ J Gend Soc Policy Law; 2000; 8(2):471-515. PubMed ID: 16594110
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The Supreme Court and the purposes of medicine.
    Bloche MG
    N Engl J Med; 2006 Mar; 354(10):993-5. PubMed ID: 16525134
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Constitutionalizing Roe, Casey and Carhart: a legislative due-process anti-discrimination principle that gives constitutional content to the "undue burden" standard of review applied to abortion control legislation.
    Van Detta JA
    South Calif Rev Law Womens Stud; 2001; 10(2):211-92. PubMed ID: 16485363
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.