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

126 related items for PubMed ID: 1728924

  • 21.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22. After Cruzan. The U. S. Supreme Court's decision settles the case but raises new questions.
    Johnson SH.
    Health Prog; 1990 Oct; 71(8):38-41, 57. PubMed ID: 10107437
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24. Cruzan II: a clear and convincing travesty.
    Bopp J, Avila D.
    Natl Univ Law Rev; 1992 Apr; 1(1):1-47. PubMed ID: 11654704
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 25. Surrogate decisions at risk. The Cruzan case.
    Thomasma DC.
    J Am Geriatr Soc; 1990 May; 38(5):603-4. PubMed ID: 2110204
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26. Introduction: the right to die after Cruzan.
    Hoffmann DE.
    Md J Contemp Leg Issues; 1991 May; 2(2):93-7. PubMed ID: 11651214
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28. Bioethicists' statement on the U.S. Supreme Court's Cruzan decision.
    Annas GJ, Arnold B, Aroskar M, Battin P, Bartels D, Beauchamp T, Brock D, Buchanan A, Caplan A, Cohen C.
    N Engl J Med; 1990 Sep 06; 323(10):686-7. PubMed ID: 2385279
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30. Cruzan: clear and convincing? Missouri stands alone.
    Colby WH.
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1990 Sep 06; 20(5):5-6. PubMed ID: 2121666
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. Cruzan v Harmon, and In the Matter of O'Connor. Two anomalies.
    Gasner MR.
    J Am Geriatr Soc; 1990 May 06; 38(5):594-9. PubMed ID: 2332578
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32. The Nancy Cruzan case.
    N Engl J Med; 1991 Feb 21; 324(8):561-2. PubMed ID: 1992313
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33. Who shall live, who shall die. Who decides?
    Hirsh HL, Cuneo MK.
    Med Law; 1986 Feb 21; 5(2):111-50. PubMed ID: 3713456
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34. The role of state legislatures after Cruzan: what can--and should--state legislatures do?
    Rouse F.
    Law Med Health Care; 1991 Feb 21; 19(1-2):83-90. PubMed ID: 1895773
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36. Does autonomy require informed and specific refusal of life-sustaining medical treatment?
    Bradley GV, Rouse F.
    Issues Law Med; 1989 Feb 21; 5(3):301-35. PubMed ID: 2613492
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37. Need for clear and convincing evidence of a patient's wishes before artificial nutrition and hydration may be withdrawn.
    Brushwood DB.
    Am J Hosp Pharm; 1990 Dec 21; 47(12):2720-2. PubMed ID: 2278289
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38. Supreme Court asked to review application of Rehabilitation Act to medical decisions.
    Paulus SM.
    Issues Law Med; 1985 Jul 21; 1(1):69-76. PubMed ID: 2931399
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 7.