The value of external peer review after the Health Care Quality Improvement Act and Patrick v. Burget.
作者信息
Couch J B, Kauffman A, Merry M
出版信息
Qual Assur Util Rev. 1989 Aug;4(3):86-8. doi: 10.1177/0885713x8900400307.
PMID:2535582
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
The value of external peer review after the Health Care Quality Improvement Act and Patrick v. Burget.《医疗保健质量改进法案》和帕特里克诉伯杰特案之后外部同行评审的价值。
Qual Assur Util Rev. 1989 Aug;4(3):86-8. doi: 10.1177/0885713x8900400307.
2
The impact of Patrick v. Burget on peer review.帕特里克诉伯杰案对同行评审的影响。
Med Staff Couns. 1988 Fall;2(4):13-21.
3
Impact of Patrick v Burget.
JCAH Perspect. 1986 Jul-Aug;6(7-8):7-9.
4
Medical staff peer review--living with the Health Care Quality Improvement Act.医务人员同行评审——与《医疗保健质量改进法案》共存
Med Staff Couns. 1988 Fall;2(4):1-12.
5
Legal aspects of peer review. Patrick v Burget in the U.S. Supreme Court: its impact on peer review.同行评审的法律问题。美国最高法院的帕特里克诉伯杰案：其对同行评审的影响。
Qual Assur Util Rev. 1988 May;3(2):59-60. doi: 10.1177/0885713x8800300209.
6
Peer review immunity after Patrick v. Burget.
Healthspan. 1988 Jun;5(6):2-5.
7
Patrick v. Burget; will the state action doctrine protect bad faith peer review?
Healthspan. 1988 Feb;5(2):20-2.
8
Antitrust. Is quality review in jeopardy?
Med World News. 1988 Jun 27;29(12):34-6, 38, 43-7.
9
PL 99-660: improved protections or expensive requirements?
Health Prog. 1988 May;69(4):59-62.
10
Patrick v. Burget: impact on rural peer review activities.
Health Prog. 1988 Sep;69(7):16, 18.
Zotero 插件