The Effectiveness and Acceptability of Pipelle Endometrial Sampling versus Classical Dilatation and Curettage: A Three-Year Observational Study.

Rezk M, Sayyed T, Dawood R

DOI: 10.1159/000444711
Published: 2016
Container: Gynecologic and obstetric investigation
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:10.1159/000444711,
  title = {The Effectiveness and Acceptability of Pipelle Endometrial Sampling versus Classical Dilatation and Curettage: A Three-Year Observational Study.},
  author = {Rezk M and Sayyed T and Dawood R},
  year = {2016},
  journal = {Gynecologic and obstetric investigation},
  doi = {10.1159/000444711},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1159/000444711}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - The Effectiveness and Acceptability of Pipelle Endometrial Sampling versus Classical Dilatation and Curettage: A Three-Year Observational Study.
AU  - Rezk M
AU  - Sayyed T
AU  - Dawood R
PY  - 2016
JO  - Gynecologic and obstetric investigation
DO  - 10.1159/000444711
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1159/000444711
ER  -

APA

M, R., T, S., & R, D. (2016). The Effectiveness and Acceptability of Pipelle Endometrial Sampling versus Classical Dilatation and Curettage: A Three-Year Observational Study.. Gynecologic and obstetric investigation. https://doi.org/10.1159/000444711

Source records

pubmed · retrieved 2026-09-25T01:17:35.144Z