Mentioned in ?
References in periodicals archive ?
Given the profound financial and reputational harm to an individual LIP whose privileges are wrongfully terminated, as well as the financial and legal exposure to the hospital resulting from valid claims of malicious peer review, (3) the governing body and CEO are morally obligated to rethink how best to safeguard against sham peer review.
The doors to the courts remain open to doctors who are subjected to unjustified or malicious peer review, and they may seek appropriate injunctive and declaratory relief in response to such treatment.