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 *

147 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 4474193)

  • 21. Peer review: is it working?
    Investor Owned Hosp Rev; 1976 Feb; 9(1):20-2. PubMed ID: 10273142
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Professional Standards Review Organizations (PSROs). II. Developing professional standards review in dietetics.
    Hansen SG
    J Am Diet Assoc; 1974 Dec; 65(6):656-8. PubMed ID: 4475054
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Peer review.
    Ramphal M
    Am J Nurs; 1974 Jan; 74(1):63-7. PubMed ID: 4491941
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Peer reviewers are ready to sell your track record.
    Owens A
    Med Econ; 1984 Jun; 61(12):39-40, 44, 49. PubMed ID: 10273524
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Blueprint for control: no-knock peer review.
    Mod Hosp; 1973 Jul; 121(1):7 passim. PubMed ID: 4799070
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Peer group review, an educational experience.
    Skipper JK; Mulligan JL; Garg ML; McNamara MJ
    Ohio State Med J; 1974 Aug; 70(8):488-90. PubMed ID: 4858610
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Update: PSRO transmittal. Peer review by health care practitioners other than physicians.
    Rogers J
    Med Rec News; 1977 Apr; 48(2):45-51. PubMed ID: 10305612
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Peer review.
    Denholm BE
    Mod Vet Pract; 1977 Jul; 58(7):589-93. PubMed ID: 560622
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The problems of a "gross and flagrant" peer review.
    Fitzgerald RM
    Med Group Manage; 1987; 34(4):17, 23. PubMed ID: 10301731
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. From PSROs to PROs: regs are the next major step for the new peer review law.
    Rev Fed Am Hosp; 1982; 15(6):10-32. PubMed ID: 10273309
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. A physician's perspective of peer review.
    Nelson AR
    Internist; 1986 Jul; 27(6):15-6. PubMed ID: 10278602
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Peer review and protective laws in Pennsylvania.
    Gosfield AG; Gosfield GG
    Pa Med; 1979 Jun; 82(6):44-50. PubMed ID: 572526
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Professional Standards Review Organization (PSRO). A positive look at the possibilities.
    Weaver F; Respess JC; Geoffrey L
    Va Med Mon (1918); 1973 Sep; 100(9):806-8. PubMed ID: 4738183
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Letter: Peer review or federal peering?
    N Engl J Med; 1973 Nov; 289(19):1045-6. PubMed ID: 4795415
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The evolving role of the American College of Surgeons in peer review and the PSRO legislation.
    Dunlop GR
    R I Med J; 1973 Aug; 56(8):329-32. PubMed ID: 4516956
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Peer review: current law and policy problems.
    Hyman DA
    Healthspan; 1991; 8(7):3-10. PubMed ID: 10114029
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. How to respond to a PRO quality inquiry.
    J Tenn Med Assoc; 1990 Jun; 83(6):323. PubMed ID: 2366547
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The PSRO and drug utilization review.
    Provost GP
    Am J Hosp Pharm; 1973 Jul; 30(7):583. PubMed ID: 4736661
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. PSRO: the pharmacist's role in the review process.
    Knoben JE
    Hosp Formul; 1975 Jun; 10(6):287-8. PubMed ID: 10273082
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Kansas State Nurses' Association: Professional Standards Review Organization statement.
    Kans Nurse; 1980 Feb; 55(2):12-7. PubMed ID: 6898258
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.