[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.211.168.204. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Sign In
Individual Sign In
Create an Account
Institutional Sign In
OpenAthens Shibboleth
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 760
Citations 0
Correction
January 11, 2012

Errors in Text and Figure in: Efficacy and Comparative Effectiveness of Atypical Antipsychotic Medications for Off-Label Uses in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

JAMA. 2012;307(2):147. doi:10.1001/jama.2011.1988

Errors in Text and Figure in: In the Clinical Review entitled “Efficacy and Comparative Effectiveness of Atypical Antipsychotic Medications for Off-Label Uses in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis” published in the September 28, 2011, issue of JAMA (2011;306[12]:1359-1369), 2 studies were treated as separate studies, but they are in fact the same study, and this resulted in incorrect data appearing in the text and in Figure 1. In the Results section, under the heading “Psychosis, Agitation, and Global Behavioral Symptoms in Dementia, Efficacy,” the first sentence in the second full paragraph should have read “Seventeen placebo-controlled trials14-18,23,25,26,28-32,39,43,46,48,51 reported outcomes between 6 and 12 weeks of follow-up and were included in the pooled analyses.” In the next full paragraph, the fourth sentence should have read “The pooled estimate of effect for quetiapine was similar (0.13) but was not statistically different than zero.” Two paragraphs later, right before the paragraph with the heading “Comparative Effectiveness,” the first sentence should read “For the outcome of psychosis, the pooled effect size was 0.20 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.36) for risperidone (5 trials), 0.14 (95% CI, −0.02 to 0.29) for aripiprazole (3 trials), 0.05 (95% CI, −0.07 to 0.17) for olanzapine (5 trials), and 0.04 (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.19) for quetiapine (3 trials).” In Figure 1, under the heading “Quetiapine,” the third row of data labeled “Tairot et al,46 2006” should be deleted. The second row of data should read “Tairot et al,29 2002a and Tairot et al,46 2006” and the corresponding “Standardized Mean Difference (95% CI)” should read “0.22 (−0.07 to 0.52).” The last row of data for this section of Figure 1 labeled “Subtotal,” should read “ I2 = 0%; P = .61” and the corresponding “Standardized Mean Difference (95% CI)” should read “0.13 (−0.03 to 0.28).” None of these corrections affects any of the conclusions in the article. This article was corrected online.

×