Midazolam versus propofol for reducing contractility of fatigued canine diaphragm.

Fujii Y, Toyooka H

DOI: 10.1093/bja/86.6.879
Published: 2001 Jun
Container: British journal of anaesthesia
Publisher: Not recorded
Open access: unknown

Credibility signals

serious concern Score 8/100 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. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
cautionDOI resolves: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
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. Source: DOAJ; license: CC0
not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
serious concernRetraction Watch retraction: 1 retraction notice matched this DOI. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
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. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredOpen access status: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
cautionMetadata completeness: 5 of 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present; missing fields increase uncertainty. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.1093/bja/86.6.879,
  title = {Midazolam versus propofol for reducing contractility of fatigued canine diaphragm.},
  author = {Fujii Y and Toyooka H},
  year = {2001},
  journal = {British journal of anaesthesia},
  doi = {10.1093/bja/86.6.879},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/86.6.879}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Midazolam versus propofol for reducing contractility of fatigued canine diaphragm.
AU  - Fujii Y
AU  - Toyooka H
PY  - 2001
JO  - British journal of anaesthesia
DO  - 10.1093/bja/86.6.879
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/86.6.879
ER  -

APA

Y, F., & H, T. (2001). Midazolam versus propofol for reducing contractility of fatigued canine diaphragm.. British journal of anaesthesia. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/86.6.879

Source records

pubmed · retrieved 2026-09-24T18:54:08.021Z