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 *

137 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2535582)

  • 1. The value of external peer review after the Health Care Quality Improvement Act and Patrick v. Burget.
    Couch JB; Kauffman A; Merry M
    Qual Assur Util Rev; 1989 Aug; 4(3):86-8. PubMed ID: 2535582
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The impact of Patrick v. Burget on peer review.
    Gainer PS; Miles JJ
    Med Staff Couns; 1988; 2(4):13-21. PubMed ID: 10290181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Impact of Patrick v Burget.
    JCAH Perspect; 1986; 6(7-8):7-9. PubMed ID: 10289700
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Medical staff peer review--living with the Health Care Quality Improvement Act.
    Gleitz HG; Strickland NE
    Med Staff Couns; 1988; 2(4):1-12. PubMed ID: 10290180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Legal aspects of peer review. Patrick v Burget in the U.S. Supreme Court: its impact on peer review.
    Couch JB
    Qual Assur Util Rev; 1988 May; 3(2):59-60. PubMed ID: 2980931
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. PL 99-660: improved protections or expensive requirements?
    Simonds G
    Health Prog; 1988 May; 69(4):59-62. PubMed ID: 10287183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Patrick v. Burget: impact on rural peer review activities.
    Kadzielski MA
    Health Prog; 1988 Sep; 69(7):16, 18. PubMed ID: 10288930
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

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

  • 13. Federal law offers protection for peer review.
    Holthaus D
    Hospitals; 1988 Jul; 62(13):46, 48. PubMed ID: 3384418
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Peer review after Patrick case is alive and well.
    Holthaus D
    Hospitals; 1988 Oct; 62(20):34. PubMed ID: 3169708
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 16. 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]  

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

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.