Benefit language: Criteria that will improve quality while reducing costs

JAMA

Volumn 275, Issue 8, 1996, Pages 650-657

  Eddy, David M ^a,b  

^a Kaiser Permanente S California ^*  (United States)

^b KAISER PERMANENTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL RESEARCH; CONTRACT; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH INSURANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REIMBURSEMENT; REVIEW; ARTICLE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST CONTROL; ECONOMICS; HEALTH CARE POLICY; INSURANCE; NOMENCLATURE; STANDARD; UNITED STATES;

COST CONTROL; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE REFORM; INSURANCE BENEFITS; INSURANCE, HEALTH; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; TERMINOLOGY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0030604373     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.275.8.650     Document Type: Review

References (3)

1. Eddy DM. Rationing resources while improving quality: how to get more for less. JAMA 1994;272:817-824.
2. Hall M, Anderson G. Health Insurers' Assessment of Medical Necessity. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Law School; 1992.
3. Eddy DM. What's going on in Oregon? JAMA. 1991;266:417-420.