124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7118123)
1. Knowing a review agency's "acceptability range' may help in obtaining CON approval.
Lee KE; Liu K
Hospitals; 1982 Nov; 56(21):42. PubMed ID: 7118123
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Hospital construction boom not expected despite end of some state CON programs.
Burda D
Mod Healthc; 1987 Nov; 17(23):134. PubMed ID: 10284669
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Could two-level process eliminate costly planning problems?
Tusler W
Hospitals; 1979 Feb; 53(4):85-90. PubMed ID: 103798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. CON reform: its impact on construction.
Chudler KM
Mich Hosp; 1988 May; 24(5):56-7. PubMed ID: 10287256
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Arkansas court halts construction, upholds state health plan in CON proceeding.
Nestrud CR
Health Law Vigil; 1984 Jan; 7(2):12-4. PubMed ID: 10264696
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The high cost of a CON.
Rev Fed Am Hosp; 1980 Aug; 13(4):12. PubMed ID: 10247904
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. HSA must abide by its own rules, court says.
Horty JF
Mod Healthc; 1979 Apr; 9(4):70-1. PubMed ID: 154054
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Doing more than filing and suing to get CON approval.
Robischon T
Appl Radiol; 1981; 10(3):25-8. PubMed ID: 10255055
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Pros and cons of certificates. American Health Planning Association directory suggests that certificate-of-need process is regulatory in theory, not in practice.
Romano M
Mod Healthc; 2003 Apr; 33(16):4-5, 1. PubMed ID: 12747106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Blue Cross forces Dayton hospital to abide by HSA decision.
Health Plann Manpow Rep; 1978 Aug; 7(16):9. PubMed ID: 10308141
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Health planning and the CON: changing directions.
Hash MM
Mich Hosp; 1986 Jul; 22(7):27-32. PubMed ID: 10277374
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Health systems agency and state health planning and development agency reviews; certificate of need programs--PHS.
Fed Regist; 1985 Jan; 50(9):2008-20. PubMed ID: 10270031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Hospitals hurdle CON barriers differently.
Cherskov M
Hospitals; 1986 May; 60(10):89. PubMed ID: 3699745
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Success in CON process depends on constructive attitudes and actions.
Coffey RJ
Hospitals; 1982 May; 56(10):71-4. PubMed ID: 7040203
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Banking on approval. Regulators facing CON quandary.
Galloro V
Mod Healthc; 2002 Jul; 32(30):30, 32. PubMed ID: 12195665
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Justify CON applications thoroughly.
Bogumil WA; Jones TH; Martin J
OH; 1982 Oct; 26(9):14-7. PubMed ID: 10258009
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. States vary on CON legislation.
HPN Hosp Purch News; 1984 Sep; 8(9):42, 50-1. PubMed ID: 10267904
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. CON applications in a traffic jam.
Med World News; 1985 Sep; 26(17):24. PubMed ID: 10272853
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Assessing "need" in CON proceedings.
Tedards WP
Nurs Homes; 1986; 35(3):10-3. PubMed ID: 10284042
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Lack of CON laws may create cash squeeze.
Decker R
Hosp Purch Manage; 1979 Nov; 4(11):16-9. PubMed ID: 10244217
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
