Confidentiality and Privilege of Peer Review Information: More Imagined Than Real
EngagedScholarship @ Cleveland State University (Cleveland State University)Published 1 January 1993Open access
Susan O. Schentzow, Sylvia Lynn Gillis
Citations6
Generate an AI Snapshot to get a quick, structured summary of this paper.
Study Snapshot
ObjectiveStudy objective
MethodsResearch methodology
PopulationPopulation studied
Sample sizeSample sizes
OutcomesStudy outcomes here
ResultsStudy results comes here
LimitationsResearch study limitations comes here
A concise AI-generated summary of the paper will appear here once you click Generate AI Snapshot.
Abstract
The fact-specific holding “In denying a hospital's motion for protective order under Md. R. 2-403, trial court erred by ruling that e-mails, letters, and testimony of hospital staff to medical review committee were not protected by medical review committee privilege, as Md. Code Ann., Health Occ. § 1-401(d)(1) was not limited to documents generated by the committee itself.”
Keywords
Health Professions