Reply of the Authors

Jacques Donnez

doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.07.1057

Reply of the Authors

Jacques Donnez

In: Fertility and Sterility · 2010 · vol. 94(5) , pp. e74 · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.07.1057 · W4230700177

article OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 2 in-corpus citations

Limited metadata. Only one source feed has indexed this record so far — no abstract, full text, or open-access copy is available through Endo Lab. The publisher's page (linked below) is the canonical location for the actual content. If you have institutional access, use "Find at my library".

View at publisher → View on OpenAlex

⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-13 ⓘ

The authors clarify their previous findings regarding the role of specific gene mutations in a particular disease and address criticisms of their methodology.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cites (1)

Peritoneal endometriosis, ovarian endometriosis, and adenomyotic nodules of the rectovaginal septum are three different entities 1997

Cited by (2)

References (4)

Peritoneal endometriosis, ovarian endometriosis, and adenomyotic nodules of the rectovaginal septum are three different entities via openalex
W1966488004 via openalex
W2007963957 via openalex
W2412295907 via openalex

Cited by (2)

Source provenance

openalex: last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00

License: CC0 · commercial use OK

[1] Peritoneal endometriosis, ovarian endometriosis, and adenomyotic nodules of the rectovaginal septum are three different entities 1997