Works matching DE "PHYSICIAN malpractice cases"
1
- University of New Hampshire Law Review, 2015, v. 13, n. 1, p. 99
- Article
2
- Valparaiso University Law Review, 2015, v. 49, n. 3, p. 955
- Article
3
- Revista Jurídica de la Universidad Autonóma de Madrid, 2007, n. 16, p. 171
- Article
5
- Journal of Law, Economics & Organization, 2010, v. 26, n. 3, p. 569, doi. 10.1093/jleo/ewp022
- Durrance, Christine Piette
- Article
6
- JAAPA: Journal of the American Academy of Physician Assistants (Haymarket Media, Inc.), 2009, v. 22, n. 11, p. 56, doi. 10.1097/01720610-200911000-00017
- Article
7
- New York University Law Review, 2013, v. 88, n. 4, p. 1224
- Article
8
- British Journal of Nursing, 2009, v. 18, n. 21, p. 1320, doi. 10.12968/bjon.2009.18.21.45365
- Article
9
- BJU International, 2011, v. 108, n. 2, p. 162, doi. 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10130.x
- Osman, Nadir I.;
- Collins, Gerald N.
- Article
10
- Social History of Medicine, 2017, v. 30, n. 2, p. 255, doi. 10.1093/shm/hkw053
- Article
11
- Review of Litigation, 2012, v. 31, n. 1, p. 99
- Article
12
- Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 2009, v. 37, n. 4, p. 792, doi. 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2009.00450.x
- Article
14
- Journal of the Missouri Bar, 2009, v. 65, n. 6, p. 282
- Article
15
- Indian Journal of Urology, 2009, v. 25, n. 3, p. 356, doi. 10.4103/0970-1591.56204
- Article
16
- Clinician Reviews, 2013, v. 23, n. 5, p. 21
- Pallentino, Julia;
- Lang, David M.
- Article
19
- Clinician Reviews, 2011, v. 21, n. 12, p. 55
- Lang, David M.;
- Pallentino, Julia
- Article
20
- Clinician Reviews, 2011, v. 21, n. 12, p. 51
- Pallentino, Julia;
- Lang, David M.
- Article
21
- Clinician Reviews, 2011, v. 21, n. 1, p. 5
- Article
22
- Clinician Reviews, 2011, v. 21, n. 1, p. 7
- Article
23
- Clinician Reviews, 2011, v. 21, n. 2, p. 26
- Article
24
- Clinician Reviews, 2011, v. 21, n. 2, p. 24
- Article
25
- Clinician Reviews, 2011, v. 21, n. 1, p. 10
- Article
26
- Clinician Reviews, 2009, v. 19, n. 8, p. 4
- Article
27
- Clinician Reviews, 2009, v. 19, n. 8, p. 4
- Article
28
- Clinician Reviews, 2009, v. 19, n. 8, p. 4
- Article
29
- Clinician Reviews, 2009, v. 19, n. 4, p. 11
- Article
30
- Clinician Reviews, 2009, v. 19, n. 4, p. 11
- Article
31
- Clinician Reviews, 2009, v. 19, n. 4, p. 11
- Article
32
- Clinician Reviews, 2007, v. 17, n. 10, p. 48
- Article
33
- Clinician Reviews, 2007, v. 17, n. 9, p. 40
- Article
34
- Clinician Reviews, 2007, v. 17, n. 8, p. 48
- Article
35
- Clinician Reviews, 2007, v. 17, n. 8, p. 44
- Article
36
- Clinician Reviews, 2006, v. 16, n. 10, p. 29
- Article
37
- Clinician Reviews, 2006, v. 16, n. 10, p. 28
- Article
38
- Clinician Reviews, 2006, v. 16, n. 10, p. 28
- Article
39
- Physician Executive, 1994, v. 20, n. 11, p. 50
- Article
40
- Syracuse Law Review, 2014, v. 64, n. 4, p. 899
- Article
41
- Syracuse Law Review, 2014, v. 64, n. 4, p. 777
- Lerch, Kirsten A.;
- Johnson, Stephen F.
- Article
42
- New Mexico Law Review, 2013, v. 43, n. 1, p. 241
- Article
43
- Chicago-Kent Law Review, 2012, v. 87, n. 1, p. 131
- Article
44
- Chicago-Kent Law Review, 2012, v. 87, n. 1, p. 111
- Ulfbeck, Vibe;
- Hartlev, Mette;
- Schultz, Mårten
- Article
45
- Chicago-Kent Law Review, 2012, v. 87, n. 1, p. 79
- Article
46
- Chicago-Kent Law Review, 2012, v. 87, n. 1, p. 53
- Article
47
- Chicago-Kent Law Review, 2012, v. 87, n. 1, p. 3
- Article
48
- Georgia Law Review, 2010, v. 45, n. 1, p. 275
- Article