[Skip to Content]
Sign In
Individual Sign In
Create an Account
Institutional Sign In
OpenAthens Shibboleth
Purchase Options:
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 2,210
Citations 0
October 3, 2017

Incorrect Data in the Statistical Methods Section

JAMA. 2017;318(13):1284. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.13624

In the Rational Clinical Examination article entitled “Does This Child Have Pneumonia? The Rational Clinical Examination Systematic Review”1 published in the August 1, 2017, issue of JAMA, incorrect data were reported in the Statistical Methods section. In the first paragraph of the section, the sentence should have read “From a pragmatic standpoint, at a pretest probability of 20%, the presence of a finding with an LR equal to 2 would increase the probability to 33%, and the absence of a finding with an LR equal to 0.5 would decrease the probability to 11%.” Additionally, the first sentence of the Findings section in Key Points should have read “In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the presence of hypoxia and increased work of breathing (grunting, nasal flaring, and retractions) were associated with the diagnosis of pneumonia.” This article was corrected online.

Shah  SN, Bachur  RG, Simel  DL, Neuman  MI.  Does this child have pneumonia? the Rational Clinical Examination systematic review.  JAMA. 2017;318(5):462-471.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref