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 *

170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7168454)

  • 1. Antitrust implications of health planning: National Gerimedical Hospital and Gerontology Center v. Blue Cross of Kansas City.
    Chase JB
    Am J Law Med; 1982; 8(3):321-48. PubMed ID: 7168454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Ball Memorial Hospital: Section 2 Sherman Act analysis in the alternative health care delivery market.
    Kirsch T
    Am J Law Med; 1988; 14(2-3):249-79. PubMed ID: 3072878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Vertical restraints among hospitals, physicians and health insurers that raise rivals' costs. A case study of Reazin v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas, Inc. and Ocean State Physicians Health Plan, Inc. v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Rhode Island.
    Baker JB
    Am J Law Med; 1988; 14(2-3):147-69. PubMed ID: 3245541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Law-medicine notes: Health planning, Blue Cross, and the federal antitrust laws.
    Curran WJ
    N Engl J Med; 1981 Nov; 305(20):1194-5. PubMed ID: 6169992
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Court overturns jury's verdict on Blue Cross antitrust violation claim.
    Kazon PM
    Bus Health; 1988 Nov; 6(1):44-5. PubMed ID: 10290529
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Must payers deal with their vertically integrated competitors--the Wesley Medical Center decision.
    Miles JJ
    Health Law Vigil; 1986 Aug; 9(15):11-4. PubMed ID: 10278408
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Examining exclusionary conduct of HMOs and PPOs: a case comment on Northwest Medical Laboratories v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Oregon.
    Levitt DM
    Am J Law Med; 1991; 17(3):271-88. PubMed ID: 1785621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Antitrust assault on hospital-Blue Cross relations.
    Davis CD
    Tex Hosp; 1984 Feb; 39(9):46-7. PubMed ID: 10278223
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Court decisions give Blues plans one win, one loss in separate antitrust cases.
    Halper HR; Kazon PM
    Bus Health; 1987 Mar; 4(5):51-2. PubMed ID: 10280673
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Minimizing antitrust risks of Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans.
    Steele CJ
    J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1988; 4():227-72. PubMed ID: 10288422
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Cost containment in the health care field and the antitrust laws.
    Shapiro DI
    Am J Law Med; 1982; 7(4):425-35. PubMed ID: 7102679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comment on Kartell v. Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Inc.: an antitrust analysis of Blue Shield's reimbursement schemes.
    Wayne AB
    Am J Law Med; 1986; 11(4):465-500. PubMed ID: 3591810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Certificate-of-need in an antitrust context.
    James AE; Sloan F; Blumstein J; Winfield AC; Pendergrass HP
    J Health Polit Policy Law; 1983; 8(2):314-9. PubMed ID: 6619535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Antitrust issues in health care planning.
    Decker R
    Hosp Purch Manage; 1982 Feb; 7(2):14-6. PubMed ID: 10254100
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Health care planning is granted antitrust immunity.
    Bolze RS
    Health Prog; 1985 Nov; 66(9):34-5, 62. PubMed ID: 10274589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Medical care at predetermined prices does not violate antitrust laws.
    Rothschild IS
    Health Law Vigil; 1987 Apr; 10(9):5-6, 12. PubMed ID: 10281338
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Toledo Hospital, Blue Cross plan in $2.5 billion suit.
    Robinson ML
    Hospitals; 1988 Aug; 62(15):28-9. PubMed ID: 3391564
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Antitrust implications of "all-inclusive" payment methodologies: the Empire Blue Cross decision.
    Miles JJ
    Health Law Vigil; 1987 Jun; 10(13):5-7. PubMed ID: 10282184
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Antitrust and health care: provider controlled health plans and the Maricopa decision.
    Weller CD
    Am J Law Med; 1982; 8(3):223-49. PubMed ID: 6897759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.