[Skip to Content]
Sign In
Individual Sign In
Create an Account
Institutional Sign In
OpenAthens Shibboleth
Purchase Options:
[Skip to Content Landing]
June 21, 2016

Incorrect Wording in Results Section and Data in Tables 3 and 4

JAMA. 2016;315(23):2624. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.7407

In the Original Investigation entitled “Clinical Risk Score for Persistent Postconcussion Symptoms Among Children With Acute Concussion in the ED” published in the March 8, 2016, issue of JAMA,1 there was incorrect wording in the Results section of the text and data transcription errors in Tables 3 and 4 that occurred when these Tables were split. In the Results section of the text, “Validation Cohort” subsection, the second sentence should be “For patients not at low risk (≤3 points), the sensitivity was 93.5% (95% CI, 90.0%-95.8%), specificity was 18.1% (95% CI, 15.2%-21.4%), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.36 (95% CI, 0.23-0.58); the negative predictive value was 84.9% (95% CI, 77.6%-90.1%) and the positive predictive value was 35.9% (95% CI, 32.6%-39.5%).” In Table 3, in the third to last row entitled “Appears dazed and confused, Yes,” the data in column 4 should be “1.4 (1.1-1.7)”; in the next row entitled “Appears confused about events, Yes,” the data in column 4 should be “1.3 (1.0-1.6)”; and in the last row entitled “Answering questions slowly, Yes,” the data in column 4 should be “1.7 (1.4-2.1).” In Table 4, in the first row entitled “Repeats questions, Yes,” the data in column 4 should be “1.4 (1.1-1.9).” This article was corrected online.

Zemek  R, Barrowman  N, Freedman  SB,  et al; Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC) Concussion Team.  Clinical risk score for persistent postconcussion symptoms among children with acute concussion in the ED.  JAMA. 2016;315(10):1014-1025.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref