Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
In the Clinical Review entitled “Does This Patient Have Acute Mountain Sickness? The Rational Clinical Examination Systematic Review” published in the November 14, 2017, issue of JAMA,1 a numeric value in the equation in footnote a of Table 2 was incorrect. The footnote should have read: “Based on the random-effects meta-regression model of the 6 scores in 91 studies, the predicted prevalence (%) ≈ 13.4 × [altitude (m)/1000] − 14.2. For example, travelers at 2500 m would have an estimated prevalence of 19% ≈ 13.4 × [2500/1000] – 14.2.” In the Scenario Resolution section, the second sentence should have read: “Based on our model, predicted prevalence of moderate to severe AMS at 4000 m (13 100 ft) is approximately 39% (Figure).” The fourth sentence in the Scenario Resolution section should have read: “Thus, the probability that the patient has AMS is approximately 67%.” This article was corrected online.
Incorrect Data in Table Footnote and Text. JAMA. 2018;319(23):2443. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.7574
Create a personal account or sign in to: