Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Laparoscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of endometriosis. Although some forms of the disease, such as ovarian endometriomas or deep infiltrating lesions, can now be reliably diagnosed using non-invasive instruments, adhesions and superficial implants cannot be identified without surgery. Identification of these latter forms of the disease has been the main rationale for claiming the necessity to identify non-invasive diagnostic tests to detect endometriosis. In this opinion paper, we analyse the pros and cons of the availability of this kind of test in the current context of our knowledge of the disease. In particular, we emphasize that this instrument may be of benefit provided that the test is not used as a screening test.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deq141 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!