[Skip to Content]
Sign In
Individual Sign In
Create an Account
Institutional Sign In
OpenAthens Shibboleth
Purchase Options:
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 645
Citations 0
December 4, 2018

Clarification for Reported Colposcopy Rates

JAMA. 2018;320(21):2273. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.17912

In the Original Investigation titled “Effect of Screening With Primary Cervical HPV Testing vs Cytology Testing on High-grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia at 48 Months: The HPV FOCAL Randomized Clinical Trial,”1 published in the July 3, 2018, issue, the colposcopy referral rates should have included the term “per 1000” in the Results section. The sentences under Secondary End Points in the Results section should have read as follows: “Colposcopy referral rates (per 1000) in the intervention group were significantly higher in round 1 (intervention: 57.0 [95% CI, 52.5-61.9] vs control: 30.8 [95% CI, 27.5-34.5]; absolute difference between intervention and control: 26.2 [95% CI, 20.4-32.1])” and “Cumulative colposcopy referral rates (per 1000) were similar between both groups (intervention: 106.2 [95% CI, 100.2-112.5]; control: 101.5 [95% CI, 95.6-107.8]; absolute difference between intervention and control: 4.7 [95% CI, −4.0 to 13.4]).” This article was corrected online.

Ogilvie  GS, van Niekerk  D, Krajden  M,  et al.  Effect of screening with primary cervical HPV testing vs cytology testing on high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia at 48 months: the HPV FOCAL randomized clinical trial.  JAMA. 2018;320(1):43-52. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.7464PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref