[Skip to Navigation]
Sign In
October 14, 2019

Errors in Abstract and Figure

JAMA Pediatr. 2019;173(12):1215. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.4171

In the Original Investigation titled “Effect of Docosahexaenoic Acid Supplementation vs Placebo on Developmental Outcomes of Toddlers Born Preterm: A Randomized Clinical Trial,”1 there were errors in the Abstract and Figure regarding the numbers of children assessed and excluded. When the authors generated the original Figure, they used a database created in Microsoft Access that tracked recruitment status for each family potentially eligible for the trial. However, they recently realized when using the database for another purpose that a database filter had been in place such that a subset of families was not displayed when tallying a few of the sums that appear near the top of the Figure. The Figure should indicate that 4142 children were assessed for eligibility and 3765 were excluded (927 not meeting inclusion criteria, 1172 declined to participate, and 1666 other reasons including unable to locate, nonresponsive, and no show to first visit). Also, the second to last sentence in the “Design, Setting, and Participants” paragraph of the abstract should read as follows: “Of 4142 children assessed, 1549 were eligible, 1172 declined, and 377 enrolled and were randomized.” This article was corrected online.

Keim  SA, Boone  KM, Klebanoff  MA,  et al.  Effect of docosahexaenoic acid supplementation vs placebo on developmental outcomes of toddlers born preterm: a randomized clinical trial.  JAMA Pediatr. 2018;172(12):1126-1134. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.3082PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref