143 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2980922)
1. Legal aspects of the medical staff peer review process. The Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986--boon or bane?
Couch JB
Qual Assur Util Rev; 1988 Feb; 3(1):24-6. PubMed ID: 2980922
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Hospital liability for defamation of character during the peer review process: sticks and stones may break my bones, but words may cost me my job.
Oliverio J
Spec Law Dig Health Care (Mon); 1991 Sep; (151):7-28. PubMed ID: 10114742
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Implementing the Health Care Quality Improvement Act.
Pugsley SC
Leg Med; 1990; ():217-42. PubMed ID: 2130197
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. The National Practitioner Data Bank: the first 18 months.
Puryear MA; Politzer RM; Anderson J; Mullan F
Physician Exec; 1993; 19(1):13-7. PubMed ID: 10125933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Data bank reporting requirements pose vexing issues.
Tapay N
Physician Exec; 1992; 18(1):53-4. PubMed ID: 10116425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Should due process be part of hospital peer review?
Segall SE; Pearl W
South Med J; 1993 Mar; 86(3):368-9. PubMed ID: 8451682
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Austin v. McNamara: antitrust immunity for peer review under the Health Care Quality Improvement Act.
Herzog JP; Fisher DR
Med Staff Couns; 1993; 7(2):55-61. PubMed ID: 10183844
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The antitrust laws and the medical peer review process.
Hammack JM
J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1993; 9():419-50. PubMed ID: 10126945
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Court cases testing scope of federal law's peer review immunity.
Burda D
Mod Healthc; 1992 Aug; 22(34):80. PubMed ID: 10119842
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Adapting to the National Practitioner Data Bank: perspectives for physicians.
Gagliano RD; Butler DL
Med Staff Couns; 1991; 5(4):1-9. PubMed ID: 10114111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The Health Care Quality Improvement Act in the courts: fast-acting cure for physician peer review headaches?
Donovan RE
J Health Hosp Law; 1995; 28(5):257-68, 312. PubMed ID: 10156292
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Quality assurance implications of federal peer review laws. The Health Care Quality Improvement Act and the National Practitioner Data Bank.
Snelson E
Qual Assur Util Rev; 1992; 7(1):2-11. PubMed ID: 1603858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Strategies for eliminating unfairness in peer review.
Rozovsky FA; Rozovsky LE
Med Staff Couns; 1992; 6(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 10115449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Is HCQIA (Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986) protecting peer review from antitrust claims?
Cross LL
Healthspan; 1993 Jun; 10(6):11-3. PubMed ID: 10127301
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Court orders removal of report from National Practitioner Data Bank. Simpkins v. Shalala.
Hosp Law Newsl; 1999 Mar; 16(5):6-8. PubMed ID: 10346624
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 (HCQIA).
Wecht CH
Leg Med; 1991; ():269-85. PubMed ID: 1821897
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Peer review immunity: history, operation, and recent decisions--has HCQIA accomplished its goals?
Cassidy MA
Health Care Law Mon; 2002 May; ():3-9. PubMed ID: 12436737
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Medical staff credentialing: a prescription for reducing antitrust liability.
Peters BM; Maneval WC
Law Med Health Care; 1991; 19(1-2):120-33. PubMed ID: 1895761
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Professional peer review. Precautions for physicians.
Struthers MS; Snelson EA
Minn Med; 1991 Aug; 74(8):27-30. PubMed ID: 1921931
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The National Practitioner Data Bank: coping with the uncertainties.
Lovitky JA
J Health Law; 2000; 33(2):355-79. PubMed ID: 11010448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
