148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23104048)
1. Sorrell v. IMS Health: issues and opportunities for informaticians.
Petersen C; Demuro P; Goodman KW; Kaplan B
J Am Med Inform Assoc; 2013 Jan; 20(1):35-7. PubMed ID: 23104048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Prescription data mining, medical privacy and the First Amendment: the U.S. Supreme Court in Sorrell v. IMS health Inc.
Boumil MM; Dunn K; Ryan N; Clearwater K
Ann Health Law; 2012; 21(2):447-91, 4 p preceding i. PubMed ID: 22606922
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A critical analysis of Sorrell v. IMS Health, Inc.: Pandora's box at best.
Bibet-Kalinyak I
Food Drug Law J; 2012; 67(2):191-241, ii. PubMed ID: 24620419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc.: data mining of pharmacy records and drug marketing as free speech.
Cartwright-Smith L; Lopez N
Public Health Rep; 2013; 128(1):64-6. PubMed ID: 23277662
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Higher First Amendment hurdles for public health regulation.
Outterson K
N Engl J Med; 2011 Aug; 365(7):e13. PubMed ID: 21812665
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Data-mining law struck down. Supreme court sides with drug companies in Vermont ruling.
Carlson J
Mod Healthc; 2011 Jun; 41(26):8-9. PubMed ID: 21853604
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The moral from Sorrell: educate, don't legislate.
Gooch GR; Rohack JJ; Finley M
Health Matrix Clevel; 2013; 23(1):237-77. PubMed ID: 23808102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Prescriptions, privacy, and the First Amendment.
Curfman GD; Morrissey S; Drazen JM
N Engl J Med; 2011 May; 364(21):2053-5. PubMed ID: 21524208
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Selling health data: de-identification, privacy, and speech.
Kaplan B
Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 2015 Jul; 24(3):256-71. PubMed ID: 26059952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. How Should Health Data Be Used?
Kaplan B
Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 2016 Apr; 25(2):312-29. PubMed ID: 26957456
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Prescriptions, privacy, and the first amendment.
Gewurz AT
N Engl J Med; 2011 Aug; 365(5):474. PubMed ID: 21812695
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The future of off-label marketing regulations in the post-Sorrell era.
Iraggi J
Seton Hall Law Rev; 2013; 43(3):1137-63. PubMed ID: 23802338
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Restrictions on the use of prescribing data for drug promotion.
Mello MM; Messing NA
N Engl J Med; 2011 Sep; 365(13):1248-54. PubMed ID: 21812664
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Commercial speech bruises health privacy in the Supreme Court.
Allen AL
Hastings Cent Rep; 2011; 41(6):8-9. PubMed ID: 22238895
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. No. 18-251 In The Supreme Court of the United States.
J Leg Med; 2019; 39(3):299-334. PubMed ID: 31626577
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. 2012-2013 National Health Law Moot Court Competition problem.
J Leg Med; 2013; 34(4):341-56. PubMed ID: 24328514
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Prescription data mining and the protection of patients' interests.
Orentlicher D
J Law Med Ethics; 2010; 38(1):74-84. PubMed ID: 20446986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Privacy, consent, and the electronic mental health record: The Person vs. the System.
Clemens NA
J Psychiatr Pract; 2012 Jan; 18(1):46-50. PubMed ID: 22261983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. HIPAA hurdles. New rules pose complex challenges for providers.
Carlson J
Mod Healthc; 2013 Sep; 43(38):32-3. PubMed ID: 24340739
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Mining the human genome after Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics.
Evans BJ
Genet Med; 2014 Jul; 16(7):504-9. PubMed ID: 24357850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
