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.
122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8064093)
41. Quality improvement and disadvantaged people: quality improvement organizations' activities reducing disparities--a symposium: Part 1. Introduction. Weingarten JP; Fitzgerald D J Health Hum Serv Adm; 2003; 26(2):141-52. PubMed ID: 15330487 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
42. HCFA's close encounter with CQI. QRC Advis; 1992 May; 8(7):1-7. PubMed ID: 10118704 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
43. [Evaluation of the cost effectiveness and quality of hospital treatment: the American Medicare Peer Review Organization model]. Kersting T; Eichhorn S Chirurg; 1994 Nov; 65(11):suppl 235-41. PubMed ID: 7821056 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
44. Health care quality improvement in Florida. Ashkar F; Barnett J J Fla Med Assoc; 1998 Apr; 85(1):6-7. PubMed ID: 9782718 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
45. The vital signs of quality improvement organizations. Pentecost MJ J Am Coll Radiol; 2005 Dec; 2(12):975-8. PubMed ID: 17411979 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
46. Informatics, imaging, and healthcare quality management: imaging quality improvement opportunities and lessons learned form HCFA's Health Care Quality Improvement Program. Grant JB; Hayes RP; Baker DW; Cangialose CB; Kieszak SM; Ballard DJ Clin Perform Qual Health Care; 1997; 5(3):133-9. PubMed ID: 10169185 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. 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]
49. PRO review changes affect quality management. Martin CA J Qual Assur; 1988; 10(4):14-5. PubMed ID: 10303143 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. Medicare PROs and the assessment of quality: should physician-specific quality data be released to consumers? Baker N J Health Hosp Law; 1992 Apr; 25(4):97-109, 117. PubMed ID: 10123435 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. Health care south of the border: the problems sound familiar. Rogans J CMAJ; 1989 Mar; 140(6):704-7. PubMed ID: 2493332 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
52. The role of the PROs. Scala M Issue Brief Cent Medicare Educ; 2001; 2(2):1-8. PubMed ID: 11859894 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Compliance. S D Med; 2008 Jan; 61(1):21. PubMed ID: 18323310 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. New Jersey's case for local control of the Medicare review process. Kingsley DI; Rodi A N J Med; 1992 Jul; 89(7):527-8. PubMed ID: 1305270 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Reduction of use of potentially inappropriate medications in the elderly. Gold JA; French B; Vermeulen LC WMJ; 2008 Jul; 107(4):213-4. PubMed ID: 18702440 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
56. PRO objectives and quality criteria. Grimaldi PL; Micheletti JA Hospitals; 1985 Feb; 59(3):64-7. PubMed ID: 3881333 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
57. How physicians can avoid problems with the PRO. Ponder S Colo Med; 1989 Dec; 86(18):387-8. PubMed ID: 2689059 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]