Showing 1 – 20 of 890
Relevance | Newest | Oldest |
  • JAMA August 8, 2017

    Figure: US States Requiring All-Party or Single-Party Consent for Audio Recording of Conversations

    Connecticut requires all-party consent for recording telephone calls, but not for face-to-face conversations (Conn Gen Stat §§53a-187[a][2], 189). Similarly, Nevada requires all-party consent for wire recordings (unless an emergency precludes obtaining consent from both parties; Nev Rev Stat §§200.620 and 48.077). Vermont does not have a wiretapping statute; however, there is a possibility that nonconsensual recording could be deemed an invasion of privacy in this state. Michigan appears to require all-party consent (Mich Comp Laws §750.539c); however, an appellate court interpretation suggests that only a single party’s consent may be required when the person making the recording is a party to the conversation (Sullivan v Gray, 11 Mich App 476, 481, 324 NW2d 58 [1982]). Because there is some uncertainty with Michigan, we have erred toward a strict statutory interpretation. Oregon law allows for a single party alone to consent to recording of a telephone conversation (Or Rev Stat Ann §165.540[1][a]), but requires consent of all participants for in-person conversations (Or Rev Stat Ann §165.540[1][c]). The constitutionality of this all-party consent rule was upheld in Oregon v Knobel, 777 P2d 985 (Or Ct App 1989). In addition to criminal penalties, civil liability may occur under wiretapping laws or a claim for invasion of privacy. If sued, the patient could be required to pay for any attorney’s fees incurred by the physician and costs as well as damages (eg, NH RSA §570A:11).
  • Fees for Certification and Finances of Medical Specialty Boards

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2017; 318(5):477-479. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.7464

    This study investigates fees charged to physicians for certification examinations and finances of the American Board of Medical Specialties member boards.

  • Senate Questions Orphan Drug Pricing

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2017; 317(10):1009-1009. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.1429
  • Variation in the Ratio of Physician Charges to Medicare Payments by Specialty and Region

    Abstract Full Text
    free access
    JAMA. 2017; 317(3):315-318. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.16230

    This study uses data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to understand the extent and variation of physician excess charges by specialty and geographic region.

  • Improving Benefit Design to Promote Effective, Efficient, and Affordable Care

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2016; 316(16):1651-1652. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.13637

    This Viewpoint from the National Academy of Medicine’s 2016 Vital Directions initiative proposes improvements to the design of health benefits in the United States to enable more effective, efficient, and affordable care for patients.

  • JAMA June 7, 2016

    Figure: Payment Models in the Traditional Medicare Program

    aAs of January 1, 2016, participants included 337 awardees and 1237 episode initiators (including 409 acute care hospitals, 700 skilled nursing facilities, 288 physician group practices, 100 home health agencies, 9 inpatient rehabilitation facilities, and 1 long-term care hospital) according to the CMS.bThe Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) will adjust physician fees up or down based on quality, electronic health record adoption, and other factors as part of the Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA).
  • Immunization Policy and the Importance of Sustainable Vaccine Pricing

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2016; 315(10):981-982. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0469

    This Viewpoint discusses vaccine costs and policy and explains the importance of balancing these factors to provide optimal care while restricting spending on costly interventions with limited benefit.

  • Indication-Specific Pricing for Cancer Drugs

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2014; 312(16):1629-1630. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.13235

    This Viewpoint addresses the benefits and challenges of adopting indication-specific pricing for cancer drugs.

  • Association Between Availability of Health Service Prices and Payments for These Services

    Abstract Full Text
    free access
    JAMA. 2014; 312(16):1670-1676. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.13373

    This analysis of claims data from employer-insured patients found that those who accessed a pricing platform to check the cost of clinician visits, laboratory testing services, or imaging studies had lower total claims payments than those who did not check prices.

  • Total Expenditures per Patient in Hospital-Owned and Physician-Owned Physician Organizations in California

    Abstract Full Text
    free access
    JAMA. 2014; 312(16):1663-1669. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.14072

    Robinson and Miller determine whether total expenditures per patient were higher in medical groups owned by local hospitals or multihospital systems compared with groups owned by participating physicians in California between 2009 and 2012.

  • Physician Practice Competition and Prices Paid by Private Insurers for Office Visits

    Abstract Full Text
    free access
    JAMA. 2014; 312(16):1653-1662. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.10921

    This retrospective study reports that more competition among US physicians is related to lower prices paid by private preferred provider organizations for office visits.

  • Pricing for Orphan Drugs: Will the Market Bear What Society Cannot?

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2013; 310(13):1343-1344. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.278129
  • Industry-Sponsored Clinical Trials in Emerging Markets: Time to Review the Terms of Engagement

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2013; 310(9):907-908. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.276913
  • Harmonizing Reporting of Financial Conflicts

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2013; 309(1):19-19. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.156627
  • New HIV Drug Pricing

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2012; 308(14):1421-1421. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.13452
  • Overcoming the Pricing Power of Hospitals

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2012; 308(12):1213-1214. doi: 10.1001/2012.jama.11910
  • Federal Grant Questioned

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2012; 308(2):123-123. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.7883

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2012; 307(17):1782-1782. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.503
  • Eliminating Waste in US Health Care

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2012; 307(14):1513-1516. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.362
    Berwick and Hackbarth use a “wedges” model to propose how reducing waste in 6 different categories could bring US health care costs into a sustainable range.
  • Realigning Incentives for Developing and Pricing New Anticancer Treatments

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2011; 305(22):2347-2348. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.793