Explore the latest in law and medicine, including malpractice, regulation, and legislation affecting public health and clinical practice.
This Viewpoint discusses the 2019 Box v Planned Parenthood US Supreme Court ruling that upheld an Indiana provision mandating that abortion facilities bury or cremate fetal remains, characterizing the law as a “targeted restriction” law intended to place undue burden on abortion providers and patients and incrementally reduce access to abortion and related reproductive health services.
This cohort study evaluates whether restrictive housing, otherwise known as solitary confinement, during incarceration is associated with reincarceration and mortality after release.
This Viewpoint proposes a template for thinking about physician malpractice liability arising from use of artificial intelligence (AI) in clinical practice, and identifies scenarios with and without injury and liability vs based on alignment of AI recommendations with standards of care, AI accuracy, and physician decisions in response.
The Viewpoint describes the current shortcomings of civil commitment for individuals who use opioids in the United States.
This cross-sectional study examines state drug pricing transparency laws enacted to increase supply chain price transparency in the United States.
This Viewpoint uses Dinerstein v Google, a class action complaint in Illinois alleging that an academic medical center violated patient privacy by giving timestamped electronic health record (EHR) data to Google for development of their novel EHR system, to review the ways privacy laws like HIPAA are based on outdated technologies and data transfer standards and to call for a rethinking of data sharing governance appropriate to contemporary infrastructure and expectations of interoperability.
This Viewpoint examines the weak points in adverse event reporting requirements for producers of compounded drugs and offers solutions to improve adverse event reporting and analysis.
This cross-sectional study examines whether a childhood history of exposure to parental incarceration and/or juvenile justice involvement is associated with mental health outcomes in early adulthood.
This Viewpoint explores the incorporation of autopsy analyses into neurology drug clinical trials and discusses their use as well as barriers to implementation and potential solutions.
This study uses 2017 court records to characterize how frequently Virginia hospitals take legal action to garnish patients’ wages to recover unpaid medical expenses, and the characteristics of hospitals and patient employers associated with the actions.
In May 2019 the US Supreme Court sent back to lower courts the question of whether Merck Sharpe & Dohme Corp was liable for atypical fractures from its osteoporosis drug alendronate because it did not identify the adverse effect in the product’s label. This Viewpoint discusses the legal questions of liability raised by the case and the implication of the decision for the pharmaceutical industry and for patients alleging harmed from prescription drugs.
This study uses Medicare claims data to identify the rate of advanced imaging tests among physicians whose peers had a malpractice injury report.
This cross-sectional study reviews New Drug Applications for new molecular entities and Biologics License Applications for new and biosimilar biological products submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration to assess how frequently applicants disclose applications in the media.
This cross-sectional study uses data from the US National Survey on Drug Use and Health to estimate changes in nonmedical prescription opioid use and prescription opioid use disorder in states that have legalized the use of medical marijuana.
This cross-sectional study assesses the reach of court-ordered antismoking advertisements among the US adult population, stratified by demographic characteristics and tobacco use.
This observational study uses yearly cross-sectional school-entry data to calculate changes in rates of kindergartners attending California schools who were not up to date on required vaccinations before and after legislative and administrative initiatives in 2014-2017 intended to increase vaccine uptake.
This Viewpoint examines a recent case filed in Alabama involving a man naming the aborted fetus as a co-plaintiff in a suit against the manufacturer of an abortion pill and the clinic that provided it to his then-girlfriend who ended her pregnancy at 6 weeks, and the challenges this case could have for reproductive rights in the United States.
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: