To the Editor On behalf of my coauthors, I write to explain an error that occurred in our Research Letter, “Differences in Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing Among Urologists and Primary Care Physicians Following the 2012 USPSTF Recommendations,”1 published in the April 2016 issue of JAMA Internal Medicine. Following a query to the editor and statistical review regarding the odds ratio reported in the Figure of that article, we reconducted the statistical analysis to provide adjusted odds ratios. This new analysis resulted in corrections to the text in the Results and Discussion section and to the Figure. The adjusted odds ratios are consistent with the original observed and reported findings; that is, there was a decrease in prostate-specific antigen testing among primary care physicians (n = 1109) and urologists (n = 113) following the release of the USPSTF recommendations. The significance of those results remains the same: the decrease among primary care physicians was statistically significant, while the decrease among urologists was not. However, the result of the interaction analysis was no longer significant, most likely owing to the small number of urologists. We have thoroughly reviewed our analyses, and no other errors were found. We apologize to the readers and editors of the journal for any confusion this may have caused. The original Research Letter has been corrected online.
Corresponding Author: Quoc-Dien Trinh, MD, Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 45 Francis St, ASB II-3, Boston, MA 02115 (firstname.lastname@example.org).
Published Online: August 15, 2016. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.5051.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.
Trinh Q. A Reanalysis of Study of Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing Among Urologists. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(10):1579. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.5051