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.
172 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3770707)
21. Are hospital peer review committees immune from federal antitrust liability? FitzGerald RM; Howarth BM Med Group Manage J; 1989; 36(1):14. PubMed ID: 10291907 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. Antitrust and hospital peer review. Blumstein JF; Sloan FA Law Contemp Probl; 1988; 51(2):7-92. PubMed ID: 10295966 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. States can't shield peer review from antitrust--high court. Burda D Mod Healthc; 1988 May; 18(21):5. PubMed ID: 10324515 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Peer review after Patrick. Gebhard PG; Polk DJ Bull Am Coll Surg; 1988 Oct; 73(10):4-7. PubMed ID: 10289975 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Impact of Patrick v Burget. JCAH Perspect; 1986; 6(7-8):7-9. PubMed ID: 10289700 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. 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]
29. Antitrust law and peer review remain at odds. Riffer J Hospitals; 1986 Feb; 60(3):58. PubMed ID: 3753695 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Pitfalls of peer review: lesson from the Patrick case. Vander Veer JB Physicians Manage; 1985 Oct; 25(10):162-3, 166-9. PubMed ID: 10278364 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Staff privileges--$2 million antitrust judgment reversed. Carlson DR Health Law Vigil; 1986 Oct; 9(21):1-4. PubMed ID: 10284024 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Medical staff peer review and federal antitrust scrutiny. LaCava FW Bull Am Coll Surg; 1985 Aug; 70(8):40-1. PubMed ID: 10272117 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. 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]
36. Medical staff antitrust decisions examine defenses available to defendants. Hosp Law Newsl; 1990 Jun; 7(8):1-6. PubMed ID: 10104849 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. 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]
38. Oregon responds to physicians' fears of peer review. Koska MT Hospitals; 1990 Jan; 64(1):70-1. PubMed ID: 2294040 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Legal immunity for medical peer-review programs. New policies explored. Curran WJ N Engl J Med; 1989 Jan; 320(4):233-5. PubMed ID: 2783210 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Antitrust. Fear of the peer review. Lerner AN; Spong SG Group Pract J; 1989; 38(5):22, 24-7. PubMed ID: 10295461 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]