We cannot verify your location
Browse Book and Journal Content on Project MUSE
OR

  Volume 39, Number 6, November-December 2009

Table of Contents

Would better medical evidence lead to better health care?

Field Notes

p. c2
|

From the Editor

Salad Days

p. 2
|

Another Voice

A Possible Solution, But Not the Last Word

p. 3
|

Letters

The Point of Control: Can a Regulated Organ Market Be Moral?

pp. 4-5
|

The Point of Control: Can a Regulated Organ Market Be Moral?

pp. 4-5
|

In Practice

Improvisation

p. 6
|

At Law

Irrational Basis: The Legal Status of Medical Marijuana

pp. 7-8
|

Policy & Politics

After Insurance Reform: An Adequate Safety Net Can Bring Us to Universal Coverage

pp. 9-10
|

Essays

Fewer than half of medical interventions are supported by scientific evidence. These essays examine the hopes that the new push for comparative effectiveness research will improve medical care, the fears that it could harm the doctor-patient relationship, and the experiences of states and countries that already put it into practice.

The Nesting-Egg Problem: Why Comparative Effectiveness Research Is Trickier Than It Looks

pp. 11-14
|

The Quality Mantra: Proceed Carefully

pp. 14-15
|

A Tool to Strengthen the Doctor-Patient Relationship

pp. 15-17
|

Define "Effective": The Curious Case of Chronic Cancer

pp. 17-20
|

Lessons from Abroad

pp. 20-22
|

Charting the Future: Credentialing, Privileging, Quality, and Evaluation in Clinical Ethics Consultation

pp. 23-33
|

Risk and the Pregnant Body

pp. 34-42
|

2009 Manuscript Reviewers

2009 Manuscript Reviewers

p. 43
|

2009 Index

2009 Index

pp. 44-47
|

Contributors

Contributors

p. 48
|

Perspective

Health Reform: What's Prevention Got to Do with It?

p. c3
|

Research Areas

Recommend

  • You have access to this content
  • Free sample
  • Open Access
  • Restricted Access