Prospective multicenter study comparing a standard reusable sphincterotome with a disposable triple-lumen sphincterotome.
- DOI
- 10.1067/mge.2000.105720
- Published
- 2000 Jun
- Container
- Gastrointestinal endoscopy
- 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:10.1067/mge.2000.105720,
title = {Prospective multicenter study comparing a standard reusable sphincterotome with a disposable triple-lumen sphincterotome.},
author = {Canard JM and Cellier C and Houcke P and Laurent J and Gorce D and Landi B},
year = {2000},
journal = {Gastrointestinal endoscopy},
doi = {10.1067/mge.2000.105720},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1067/mge.2000.105720}
}RIS
TY - JOUR TI - Prospective multicenter study comparing a standard reusable sphincterotome with a disposable triple-lumen sphincterotome. AU - Canard JM AU - Cellier C AU - Houcke P AU - Laurent J AU - Gorce D AU - Landi B PY - 2000 JO - Gastrointestinal endoscopy DO - 10.1067/mge.2000.105720 UR - https://doi.org/10.1067/mge.2000.105720 ER -
APA
JM, C., C, C., P, H., J, L., D, G., & B, L. (2000). Prospective multicenter study comparing a standard reusable sphincterotome with a disposable triple-lumen sphincterotome.. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. https://doi.org/10.1067/mge.2000.105720
Source records
- pubmed · retrieved 2026-09-25T02:18:12.092Z