{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,12]],"date-time":"2026-03-12T15:54:46Z","timestamp":1773330886516,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"BMJ","issue":"7248","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2000,6,3]]},"DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.320.7248.1504","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2002,7,27]],"date-time":"2002-07-27T10:41:20Z","timestamp":1027766480000},"page":"1504-1509","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":46,"title":["Single blind, randomised trial of efficacy and acceptability of oral Picolax versus self administered phosphate enema in bowel preparation for flexible sigmoidoscopy screening Commentary: participants should have been told they were being randomised Commentary: opportunity for patient partnership was lost"],"prefix":"10.1136","volume":"320","author":[{"given":"W. S","family":"Atkin","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"239","container-title":["BMJ"],"original-title":[],"link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/syndication.highwire.org\/content\/doi\/10.1136\/bmj.320.7248.1504","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2020,9,25]],"date-time":"2020-09-25T23:21:24Z","timestamp":1601076084000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/lookup\/doi\/10.1136\/bmj.320.7248.1504"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2000,6,3]]},"references-count":0,"journal-issue":{"issue":"7248"},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.320.7248.1504","relation":{},"ISSN":["0959-8138"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0959-8138","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2000,6,3]]}}}