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.
24. Minimizing antitrust and corporate liability risks. Weissburg C Health Prog; 1987 Apr; 68(3):68-73, 90. PubMed ID: 10282282 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. An assessment of the anticompetitive effects of preferred provider organizations. Greaney TL; Sindelar JL Inquiry; 1987; 24(4):384-91. PubMed ID: 2961699 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Can provider antitrust suits against payers be successful? Enders RJ Healthc Financ Manage; 1986 Jun; 40(6):72-80. PubMed ID: 10276682 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Antitrust exemption: are health providers crying wolf? Barnett AA J Am Health Policy; 1993; 3(3):38-41. PubMed ID: 10125734 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Court: Indiana Blues may adopt PPO plan without antitrust scrutiny. Allen HS; Rothschild IS Health Law Vigil; 1986 Apr; 9(8):4-5. PubMed ID: 10278389 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. "Free choice" as a restraint of trade, and the counterintuitive contours of competition. Weller C Health Matrix; 1985; 3(2):3-23. PubMed ID: 10300333 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Economic analysis in health care antitrust. Vita MG; Langenfeld J; Pautler P; Miller L J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1991; 7():73-115. PubMed ID: 10111250 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. How antitrust laws are changing the health care industry. Rosenfield RH; Harwell JD Health Care Strateg Manage; 1985 Jul; 3(7):4-10. PubMed ID: 10271815 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Group life & Health Insurance Co. v. Royal Drug Co.: the McCarran-Ferguson Act and Health Service Plans. Szabo DS Am J Law Med; 1980; 5(4):393-413. PubMed ID: 7377202 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Preferred provider organizations and antitrust policy: some recent issues. Costillo LB Health Matrix; 1986; 4(2):22-5. PubMed ID: 10278618 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Antitrust and affiliations among healthcare providers: the need for a level playing field. Heightchew A Hosp Health Serv Adm; 1997; 42(4):559-65. PubMed ID: 10174466 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Physician price fixing under the Sherman Act. An indirect test of the Maricopa issues. Lynk WJ J Health Econ; 1988 Jun; 7(2):95-109. PubMed ID: 10288959 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Evaluating antitrust risk in joint provider negotiations with payors. Leonard EJ Med Staff Couns; 1992; 6(1):41-7. PubMed ID: 10115450 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. U.S. Supreme Court decision in Jefferson County Pharmaceutical Association v. Abbott Laboratories et al. Podell LB Am J Hosp Pharm; 1983 Sep; 40(9):1537-8. PubMed ID: 6624759 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Supreme Court's decision adds little to antitrust analysis. Miles JJ Health Law Vigil; 1986 Jun; 9(12):12-4. PubMed ID: 10276709 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Legally speaking: Federal Trade Commission issues positive advisory opinions on antitrust implications of clinical integration. Wright R J Ark Med Soc; 2009 Oct; 106(4):88-9. PubMed ID: 19813398 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Historic Supreme Court decisions make clear that health care area is subject to antitrust scrutiny. Employee Benefit Plan Rev; 1982 Aug; 37(2):8-10. PubMed ID: 10259394 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]