177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27639929)
1. Coming full circle: a reflection on the Supreme Court's decision in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt.
Toti S
Contraception; 2016 Nov; 94(5):439-440. PubMed ID: 27639929
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt: The Empirical Case Against Trap Laws.
Goodwin M
Med Law Rev; 2017 May; 25(2):340-351. PubMed ID: 28637311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The Use of Public Health Evidence in Whole Woman's Health v Hellerstedt.
Grossman D
JAMA Intern Med; 2017 Feb; 177(2):155-156. PubMed ID: 27820613
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Reflections on Whole Woman's Health v Hellerstedt: savoring victory, anticipating further challenges.
Joffe C
Contraception; 2016 Nov; 94(5):436-438. PubMed ID: 27639928
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Finding Strength in Numbers: The Critical Role of Data in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt.
Rosen JD
Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Jan; 129(1):195-196. PubMed ID: 27926653
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Do not mess with Texas: A landmark victory for abortion access and the road ahead.
Kumar B
Contraception; 2016 Nov; 94(5):445-446. PubMed ID: 27639931
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Keeping watch: U.S. Supreme Court rulings.
Am Nurse; 2016; 48(1):4. PubMed ID: 27017685
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Will rejecting woman-protective justifications for antiabortion laws increase harassment and violence?
Cohen DS
Contraception; 2016 Nov; 94(5):441-444. PubMed ID: 27639930
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Societal implications of the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision.
Brindis CD; Laitner MH; Clayton EW; Scrimshaw SC; Grosz BJ; Simpson LA; Rosenbaum S; Brierley CL; Simon MA; Roubideaux Y; Calonge BN; Johnson PA; DeStefano L; Bear A; Arora KS; Dzau VJ
Lancet; 2024 Jun; 403(10445):2751-2754. PubMed ID: 38795714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Money, sex, and religion--the Supreme Court's ACA sequel.
Annas GJ; Ruger TW; Ruger JP
N Engl J Med; 2014 Aug; 371(9):862-6. PubMed ID: 25029337
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Requests for Self-managed Medication Abortion Provided Using Online Telemedicine in 30 US States Before and After the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization Decision.
Aiken ARA; Starling JE; Scott JG; Gomperts R
JAMA; 2022 Nov; 328(17):1768-1770. PubMed ID: 36318139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Medication Abortion Through Telemedicine: Implications of a Ruling by the Iowa Supreme Court.
Yang YT; Kozhimannil KB
Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Feb; 127(2):313-6. PubMed ID: 26942359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Justices to review federal ban on disputed abortion method; case may hinge on Alito, Court's newest member.
Greenhouse L
N Y Times Web; 2006 Feb; ():A1, A14. PubMed ID: 16514736
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. US Supreme Court expected to weaken abortion rights.
Jaffe S
Lancet; 2021 Dec; 398(10317):2137-2138. PubMed ID: 34895521
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Whole Women's Victory - or Not?
Charo RA
N Engl J Med; 2016 Sep; 375(9):809-11. PubMed ID: 27579630
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Tubal Sterilization Requests at a Single Institution Following the Supreme Court Decision to Overturn the Constitutional Right to Abortion.
Liang AC; Gliwa C; Loder CM; Dalton VK; Smith RD
JAMA; 2023 Jul; 330(4):374-375. PubMed ID: 37490094
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The Supreme Court joins the multispecialty group practice of the Congress and the President.
Darney PD; Rosenfield A
Obstet Gynecol; 2007 Aug; 110(2 Pt 1):226-7. PubMed ID: 17666593
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The Supreme Court's influence on medicine and health: the Rehnquist Court, 1986-2005.
Gostin LO
JAMA; 2005 Oct; 294(13):1685-7. PubMed ID: 16204668
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. The Supreme Court joins the multispecialty group practice of the Congress and the President.
Richman S
Obstet Gynecol; 2007 Nov; 110(5):1169; author reply 1170. PubMed ID: 17978135
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The Supreme Court joins the multispecialty group practice of the Congress and the President.
Voutsos LJ
Obstet Gynecol; 2007 Nov; 110(5):1169; author reply 1170. PubMed ID: 17978134
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
