Open Access
LETTER
Reply by Authors – Re: Canadian Pediatrics Society position statement on newborn circumcision: a risk-benefit analysis revisited
Brian J. Morris1, Jeffrey D. Klausner2, John N. Krieger3, Bradley J. Willcox4, Pierre D. Crouse5, Neil Pollock6
1
School of Medical Sciences and Bosch Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
2
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA
3
University of Washington School of Medicine, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Section of Urology, Seattle, Washington, USA
4
Department of Research, Kuakini Medical Center, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA
5
Intramed Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
6
Pollock Clinics, New Westminster and Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, British Columbia, Canada
Canadian Journal of Urology 2017, 24(1), 8687-8692.
Abstract
This article has no abstract.
Cite This Article
APA Style
Morris, B.J., Klausner, J.D., Krieger, J.N., Willcox, B.J., Crouse, P.D. et al. (2017). Reply by Authors – Re: Canadian Pediatrics Society position statement on newborn circumcision: a risk-benefit analysis revisited. Canadian Journal of Urology, 24(1), 8687–8692.
Vancouver Style
Morris BJ, Klausner JD, Krieger JN, Willcox BJ, Crouse PD, Pollock N. Reply by Authors – Re: Canadian Pediatrics Society position statement on newborn circumcision: a risk-benefit analysis revisited. Can J Urology. 2017;24(1):8687–8692.
IEEE Style
B.J. Morris, J.D. Klausner, J.N. Krieger, B.J. Willcox, P.D. Crouse, and N. Pollock, “Reply by Authors – Re: Canadian Pediatrics Society position statement on newborn circumcision: a risk-benefit analysis revisited,” Can. J. Urology, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 8687–8692, 2017.
Copyright © 2017 The Canadian Journal of Urology.