[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.146.179.146. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Sign In
Individual Sign In
Create an Account
Institutional Sign In
OpenAthens Shibboleth
[Skip to Content Landing]
Citations 0
Correction
February 25, 2004

The Return on INVEST—Correction

JAMA. 2004;291(8):944. doi:10.1001/jama.291.8.944

Differences in Percentages: In the Editorial entitled "The Return on INVEST" published in the December 3, 2003, issue of THE JOURNAL (2003;290:2859-2861), several percentages were calculated from information in the study. Although the percentages were computed correctly based on the data in the article, the derived information was not correct because some groups overlapped in the study. The correct data are as follows. On page 2859, first column, paragraph 3: " . . . all patients with diabetes, renal impairment, or heart failure (more than a third in those enrolled) were prescribed trandolapril." The actual percentage was 32%. On page 2859, column 2, paragraph 2: " . . . when study and nonstudy drugs were combined, most patients in the verapamil group (82.0%) and the atenolol group (71.6%) received the ACE inhibitor." The actual data were 69.6% for the verapamil group and 63.2% for the atenolol group. In the next sentence in that paragraph: "Moreover, combining study and nonstudy drugs, 63.0% and 81.4% of the 2 groups, respectively, also were prescribed a diuretic." The actual data were 54.9% for the verapamil group and 68% for the atenolol group. Farther down in the same paragraph: "While 35.5% of patients in the atenolol group met the requirement for trandolapril, 71.6% received an ACE inhibitor." The actual percentage of patients in the atenolol group meeting protocol requirement for trandolapril use (eg, diabetes, renal impairment, and/or heart failure) was 32.7%. The actual percentage being treated with an ACE inhibitor at 24 months was 63.2%.

×