[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 67
Correction
September 11, 2019

Error in eFigure 1 in the Supplement

JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(9):e1912622. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.12622

In the Original Investigation titled “Cost-effectiveness of Housing First Intervention With Intensive Case Management Compared With Treatment as Usual for Homeless Adults With Mental Illness: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial,”1 published August 21, 2019, there were 2 incorrect numbers in eFigure 1 in the Supplement. The numbers excluded due to missing all Health, Social, and Justice Service Use data or all Residential Time-Line Follow-Back data should be 9 for the intervention arm and 22 for the TAU arm. This article has been corrected.1

References
1.
Latimer  EA, Rabouin  D, Cao  Z,  et al; At Home/Chez Soi Investigators.  Cost-effectiveness of Housing First intervention with Intensive Case Management compared with treatment as usual for homeless adults with mental illness: secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.  JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(8):e199782. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.9782Google ScholarCrossref
×