• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Health Maintenance Organizations and the McCarran-Ferguson Act.

作者信息

Schmidt S

出版信息

Am J Law Med. 1982 Winter;7(4):437-67.

PMID:7102680
Abstract

In the past, Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) were victims of anticompetitive practices, but the growth of HMOs casts them as potential growth encouraged by both the federal and state governments. This Note discusses a solution to the potential antitrust problems. HMOs can be exempt partially from antitrust regulation by the McCarran-Ferguson Act. To secure immunity under McCarran-Ferguson, the entity must function in the business of insurance, be regulated by the state, but not be engaged in acts of boycott, coercion, or intimidation. This Note sets forth potential antitrust violations by HMOs, examining the possible application of the McCarran-Ferguson exemption to them. Each of the elements required to satisfy McCarran is discussed in general and applied to HMOs. This Note concludes that the exemption can be applied to HMOs so long as their conduct fulfills the requirements of the McCarran Act.

摘要

相似文献

1
Health Maintenance Organizations and the McCarran-Ferguson Act.
Am J Law Med. 1982 Winter;7(4):437-67.
2
Group life & Health Insurance Co. v. Royal Drug Co.: the McCarran-Ferguson Act and Health Service Plans.团体人寿与健康保险公司诉皇家药品公司案:《麦卡伦-弗格森法案》与健康服务计划
Am J Law Med. 1980 Winter;5(4):393-413.
3
Antitrust implications of chiropractic Peer Review Committees.
Am J Law Med. 1982 Spring;8(1):45-68.
4
Recent supreme court antitrust rulings in health care.美国最高法院近期关于医疗保健领域的反垄断裁决。
Am J Hosp Pharm. 1983 Apr;40(4):639-41.
5
Examining exclusionary conduct of HMOs and PPOs: a case comment on Northwest Medical Laboratories v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Oregon.审视健康维护组织(HMOs)和优先提供者组织(PPOs)的排他性行为:对西北医学实验室诉俄勒冈州蓝十字蓝盾公司案的案例评论
Am J Law Med. 1991;17(3):271-88.
6
Alternative delivery systems are focus of antitrust scrutiny.替代交付系统是反垄断审查的重点。
J Health Care Mark. 1987 Jun;7(2):77-81.
7
PPOs: a challenge to HMOs?优先提供者组织(PPOs):对健康维护组织(HMOs)的挑战?
Group Health J. 1985 Fall;6(2):22-7.
8
The McCarran-Ferguson Act's antitrust exemption for insurance: language, history and policy.《麦卡伦-弗格森法案》对保险业的反垄断豁免:措辞、历史与政策。
Duke Law J. 1978 May(2):587-643.
9
Tax policy and Health Maintenance Organizations: the case for a section 501(c)(3) tax exemption.税收政策与健康维护组织:501(c)(3) 条款税收豁免的案例
Am J Law Med. 1980 Summer;6(2):283-313.
10
HMOs carry antitrust risk.
Hospitals. 1986 Sep 20;60(18):38.