• 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

The response of the dominant firm to competition: the Ocean State case.

作者信息

Goldberg L G, Greenberg W

机构信息

Department of Finance, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL, USA.

出版信息

Health Care Manage Rev. 1995 Winter;20(1):65-74. doi: 10.1097/00004010-199502010-00008.

DOI:10.1097/00004010-199502010-00008
PMID:7744607
Abstract

The Ocean State antitrust case illustrates the operation of the competitive marketplace in health insurance. Blue Cross, the dominant firm in Rhode Island, responded competitively to the entrance of a new competitor, Ocean State, in three ways: 1) a most-favored-nation clause, 2) creation of a PPO offering similar benefits as Ocean State, and 3) an adverse selection policy. These actions are assessed to be legitimate competitive responses and the decisions of the higher courts overturning the jury verdict against Blue Cross are supported.

摘要

相似文献

1
The response of the dominant firm to competition: the Ocean State case.
Health Care Manage Rev. 1995 Winter;20(1):65-74. doi: 10.1097/00004010-199502010-00008.
2
Vertical restraints among hospitals, physicians and health insurers that raise rivals' costs. A case study of Reazin v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas, Inc. and Ocean State Physicians Health Plan, Inc. v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Rhode Island.
Am J Law Med. 1988;14(2-3):147-69.
3
Comment on Kartell v. Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Inc.: an antitrust analysis of Blue Shield's reimbursement schemes.
Am J Law Med. 1986;11(4):465-500.
4
"Blues interfered illegally with HMO.".
Mod Healthc. 1987 Nov 20;17(24):12.
5
The Marshfield Clinic case: the sound of a broken record.马什菲尔德诊所事件:老生常谈。
Ann Health Law. 1996(5):1-31.
6
Court overturns jury's verdict on Blue Cross antitrust violation claim.
Bus Health. 1988 Nov;6(1):44-5.
7
Blues' discount policy seen as antitrust issue.
Hospitals. 1986 Nov 5;60(21):36.
8
Health maintenance organizations and the role of antitrust law.
Duke Law J. 1978 May(2):487-541.
9
Minimizing antitrust risks of Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans.
J Contemp Health Law Policy. 1988 Spring;4:227-72.
10
Is this group an illegal doctor monopoly?这个团体是非法的医生垄断组织吗?
Med Econ. 1994 Sep 26;71(18):64-6, 69-70, 72 passim.

引用本文的文献

1
Marshfield Clinic, physician networks, and the exercise of monopoly power.马什菲尔德诊所、医师网络与垄断力量的行使。
Health Serv Res. 1998 Dec;33(5 Pt 2):1461-76.