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 *

199 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 4735406)

  • 21. The concept of peer review.
    Ellis G
    Pa Nurse; 1975 Jan; 30(1):10-2. PubMed ID: 830075
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Editorial: Peer review and all that.
    Moore FD
    J Indiana State Med Assoc; 1974 Nov; 67(11):1007-9. PubMed ID: 4474193
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. How to overcome barriers to effective audit.
    Barnes RH
    Hosp Med Staff; 1976 May; 5(5):1-6. PubMed ID: 1035591
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [Peer review. I. A review of the American literature].
    Stevens EC; Eijkman MA
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 1983 Nov; 90(11):540-4. PubMed ID: 6366592
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The state of peer review in Delaware today.
    Battaglia VF
    Del Med J; 1988 Apr; 60(4):231-2, 237-9. PubMed ID: 3371511
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Physician peer review: have we gone far enough or too far?
    Cardwell MS; Gay JW
    Mo Med; 1991 Apr; 88(4):221-5. PubMed ID: 1857331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The PRO utilization and quality review process: an overview--Part I.
    Politser P
    Bull Am Coll Surg; 1989 May; 74(5):17-22. PubMed ID: 10303472
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Peer review: still tilting at windmills.
    Schorr B
    Physicians Manage; 1987 Oct; 27(10):124-6, 128, 133. PubMed ID: 10302231
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Establishing Professional Standards Review Organizations.
    Blackburn GL
    N Engl J Med; 1973 Jul; 289(1):48. PubMed ID: 4736177
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. An R.N. makes the medical peer-review team.
    Kellogg N
    RN; 1976 Apr; 39(4):73-4, 76, 78 passim. PubMed ID: 1045442
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 32. Peer review organizations. Practical steps in dealing with them.
    Shook MB
    Consultant; 1988 Aug; 28(8):72-4, 76-7. PubMed ID: 10302669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Peer review organizations.
    N Engl J Med; 1986 Apr; 314(17):1121-2. PubMed ID: 3960088
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The importance of documentation in peer review.
    Kingsley DI
    N J Med; 1989 Mar; 86(3):185-6. PubMed ID: 2704433
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The changing focus of peer review under Medicare.
    Mellette PM
    Spec Law Dig Health Care (Mon); 1986 Dec; 8(10):7-48. PubMed ID: 10301158
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 37. Utilization and peer review. Medicine's privilege and responsibility.
    Schaffarzick RW; Parke HJ
    Calif Med; 1970 Aug; 113(2):80-5. PubMed ID: 5527892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. Peer review of the inexpert witness, or ... do you trust chickens to guard the coop?
    Victoroff MS
    Manag Care; 2002 Sep; 11(9):14-6. PubMed ID: 12369343
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.