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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

216 related items for PubMed ID: 15810206

  • 1. Refusal clause seen as threat to reproductive health, gag on information.
    Krisberg K.
    Nations Health; 2005 Feb; 35(1):1, 10. PubMed ID: 15810206
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Title X, the abortion debate, and the First Amendment.
    Shapiro AA.
    Columbia Law Rev; 1990 Oct; 90(6):1737-78. PubMed ID: 15739274
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. The pregnant silence: Rust v. Sullivan, abortion rights, and publicly funded speech.
    Weeks AB.
    North Carol Law Rev; 1992 Jun; 70(5):1623-68. PubMed ID: 16044600
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Radical Changes for Reproductive Health Care - Proposed Regulations for Title X.
    Bronstein JM.
    N Engl J Med; 2018 Aug 23; 379(8):706-708. PubMed ID: 30021079
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. The economics of abortion access in the US: restrictions on government funding for abortion is the post-Roe battleground.
    Fried MG.
    Conscience; 2018 Aug 23; 26(4):11-5. PubMed ID: 16619422
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Abortion legislation after Webster v. Reproductive Health Services: model statutes and commentaries.
    Smolin DM.
    Cumberland Law Rev; 2018 Aug 23; 20(1):71-163. PubMed ID: 15999438
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. A medical crisis of conscience: faith drives some to refuse patients medication or care.
    Stein R.
    Washington Post; 2006 Jul 16; ():A1, A6. PubMed ID: 16878359
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Law, medicine, and the "gag rule".
    Ball JR.
    Ann Intern Med; 1991 Sep 01; 115(5):403-4. PubMed ID: 1863032
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. An obligation to provide abortion services: what happens when physicians refuse?
    Meyers C, Woods RD.
    J Med Ethics; 1996 Apr 01; 22(2):115-20. PubMed ID: 8731539
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Pharmacies balk on after-sex pill and widen fight; right of refusal cited; many states take up the issue; citing religious and moral concerns.
    Davey M, Belluck P.
    N Y Times Web; 2005 Apr 19; ():A1, A16. PubMed ID: 15858909
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Statutory prohibition on use of appropriated funds in programs where abortion is a method of family planning; standard of compliance for family planning services projects--PHS. Final rules.
    Fed Regist; 1988 Feb 02; 53(21):2922-46. PubMed ID: 10285637
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 11.