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 *

164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8479765)

  • 1. New methodology challenges PRO.
    Harrop DE
    Pa Med; 1993 Apr; 96(4):42. PubMed ID: 8479765
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 3. Changing provider behavior--the new PRO scope of work.
    Booth P
    J AHIMA; 1992 Dec; 63(12):11-2. PubMed ID: 10123114
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Commentary: The Peer Review Organization of New Jersey, Inc.
    Kingsley DI
    J Med Soc N J; 1985 Mar; 82(3):229-30. PubMed ID: 3856688
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. MSNJ Peer Review Organization Criteria Committee.
    Krosnick A
    J Med Soc N J; 1985 Mar; 82(3):194-5. PubMed ID: 3856683
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Going after favorable PRO determinations.
    Gosfield AG
    Cost Containment; 1985 Oct; 7(19):3-6. PubMed ID: 10273714
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Management peer review audits efficiency.
    Ackerman FK
    Hospitals; 1979 May; 53(10):91-2, 97. PubMed ID: 428934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Providers question PROs' effectiveness. Critics contend peer review organizations are too costly and fail to improve the quality of care.
    Rothschild RD
    Health Prog; 1992; 73(6):28-32, 38. PubMed ID: 10119535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. PRO success vital to good public image.
    Harrop DE
    Pa Med; 1988 Nov; 91(11):22. PubMed ID: 3194140
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The peer review process.
    Mann BA
    West J Med; 1989 Nov; 151(5):561. PubMed ID: 2603425
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Professional self-regulation: peer review.
    DiAngelis AJ; Speidel TM
    Dent Clin North Am; 1985 Jul; 29(3):437-47. PubMed ID: 3861389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Peer review and protective laws in Pennsylvania.
    Gosfield AG; Gosfield GG
    Pa Med; 1979 Jun; 82(6):44-50. PubMed ID: 572526
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Update: PSRO transmittal. Peer review by health care practitioners other than physicians.
    Rogers J
    Med Rec News; 1977 Apr; 48(2):45-51. PubMed ID: 10305612
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. PSRO: the pharmacist's role in the review process.
    Knoben JE
    Hosp Formul; 1975 Jun; 10(6):287-8. PubMed ID: 10273082
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cardiac surgery review--by peers or by state?
    Porter S
    Ohio State Med J; 1985 Feb; 81(2):86-9, 91. PubMed ID: 4039049
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. KePRO emphasizes quality in peer review.
    Pa Med; 1986 Apr; 89(4):41-2, 44. PubMed ID: 3703561
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Medicare program; peer review organizations; area designation--HCFA. Final notice with comment period.
    Fed Regist; 1989 Jul; 54(145):31576-8. PubMed ID: 10318640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Do PSRO'S undercut hospital power?
    Ankrum AD
    Hosp Peer Rev; 1978 Jun; 3(6):78. PubMed ID: 10308228
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Peer participation in hospital department review.
    Peters DS
    Hosp Adm (Chic); 1975; 20(2):8-15. PubMed ID: 10294905
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.