Reconsidering menorrhagia in gynecological practice. Is a 30-year-old definition still valid?
- DOI
- 10.1016/s0301-2115(97)00275-3
- Published
- 1998 May
- Container
- European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology
- Publisher
- Not recorded
- Open access
- unknown
Credibility signals
limited evidence Score 43/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.
Show all credibility signals
- cautionDOI registered: No matching Crossref record was present in this response.
- cautionDOI resolves: No matching Crossref record was present in this response.
- not scoredDirectory of Open Access Journals: No matching DOAJ record was present in this response. No allow-list match; this is not evidence of low credibility.
- not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredRetraction Watch retraction: No retraction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredOpen access status: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored.
- cautionMetadata completeness: 5 of 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present; missing fields increase uncertainty.
Cite this work
BibTeX
@article{allodium:10.1016/s0301-2115-97-00275-3,
title = {Reconsidering menorrhagia in gynecological practice. Is a 30-year-old definition still valid?},
author = {Janssen CA and Scholten PC and Heintz AP},
year = {1998},
journal = {European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology},
doi = {10.1016/s0301-2115(97)00275-3},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/s0301-2115(97)00275-3}
}RIS
TY - JOUR TI - Reconsidering menorrhagia in gynecological practice. Is a 30-year-old definition still valid? AU - Janssen CA AU - Scholten PC AU - Heintz AP PY - 1998 JO - European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology DO - 10.1016/s0301-2115(97)00275-3 UR - https://doi.org/10.1016/s0301-2115(97)00275-3 ER -
APA
CA, J., PC, S., & AP, H. (1998). Reconsidering menorrhagia in gynecological practice. Is a 30-year-old definition still valid?. European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0301-2115(97)00275-3
Source records
- pubmed · retrieved 2026-09-27T12:26:30.388Z