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.
22. Does government oversight improve access to nursing home care? Longitudinal evidence from US counties. Howard LL Inquiry; 2014; 51():. PubMed ID: 25526725 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. California Medicaid amendments: Supreme Court vacates and remands supremacy clause private right of action issue based on changed conditions--Douglas v. Independent Living Center of Southern California. Gabrielsen L Am J Law Med; 2012; 38(4):751-4. PubMed ID: 23356104 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Suing states over threatened access to care--the Douglas decision. Rosenbaum S N Engl J Med; 2012 Apr; 366(15):e22. PubMed ID: 22455753 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Boren Amendment litigation: State court cases. Hamme JM Contemp Longterm Care; 1985 Nov; 8(11):19, 64-5. PubMed ID: 10300462 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Maximizing federal Medicaid dollars: nursing home provider tax adoption, 2000-2004. Miller EA; Wang L J Health Polit Policy Law; 2009 Dec; 34(6):899-930. PubMed ID: 20018986 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Cases with Consequences: Recent Supreme Court rulings were game-changers for the states--and not just because of the decisions on health care and same-sex marriage. Soronen L State Legis; 2015 Sep; 41(8):19-21. PubMed ID: 26320276 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. The Supreme Court and abortion: the irrelevance of medical judgment. Annas GJ Hastings Cent Rep; 1980 Oct; 10(5):23-4. PubMed ID: 7002867 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. AFTER COURT. Will Supreme Court ruling impact insurance pricing, Medicaid expansion? Stempniak M Hosp Health Netw; 2015 Jul; 89(7):16. PubMed ID: 26793907 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Medicaid and the disabled. Tanzman MR Health Aff (Millwood); 2003; 22(3):250; author reply 250-1. PubMed ID: 12757293 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. The Spending Power after NFIB: New Direction, or Medicaid Exception? Patterson E SMU Law Rev; 2015; 68(2):385-426. PubMed ID: 30028110 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Health reform and the Supreme Court: the ACA survives the battle of the broccoli and fortifies itself against future fatal attack. Ouellette A Albany Law Rev; 2012-2013; 76(1):87-119. PubMed ID: 23577375 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. In the wake of the verdict: the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on the federal health law leaves lawmakers working out what it means for their states. King M State Legis; 2012; 38(7):46-7. PubMed ID: 22893930 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act after the Supreme Court decision. Gorin SH; Moniz C Health Soc Work; 2012 Nov; 37(4):195-6. PubMed ID: 23301432 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Renee B. v. Florida Agency for Health Care Administration. Florida. Supreme Court Wests South Report; 2001; 790():1036-42. PubMed ID: 16479688 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Microsimulation of private health insurance and medicaid take-up following the U.S. Supreme court decision upholding the Affordable Care Act. Parente ST; Feldman R Health Serv Res; 2013 Apr; 48(2 Pt 2):826-49. PubMed ID: 23398372 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Medicaid after the Supreme Court decision. Berliner HS Health Econ Policy Law; 2013 Jan; 8(1):133-7. PubMed ID: 23336498 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]