Literature DB >> 31661018

Correction to: Sample size estimation for randomised controlled trials with repeated assessment of patient-reported outcomes: what correlation between baseline and follow-up outcomes should we assume?

Stephen J Walters1, Richard M Jacques2, Inês Bonacho Dos Anjos Henriques-Cadby2, Jane Candlish2, Nikki Totton2, Mica Teo Shu Xian2.   

Abstract

Following publication of the original article [1], we have been notified that one of an error in the Conclusions section of the Abstract.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID： 31661018      PMCID： PMC6816146          DOI： 10.1186/s13063-019-3732-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trials        ISSN： 1745-6215            Impact factor:   2.279


Correction to: Trials (2019) 20: 566 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3671-2 Following publication of the original article [1], we have been notified that one of an error in the Conclusions section of the Abstract. The range of correlations should read “0.4 to 0.6” instead of “0.4 to -0.6” in the phrase “There is a general consistency in the correlations between the repeated PROMs, with the majority 31 being in the range of 0.4 to 0.6.” The original article has been corrected.
  1 in total

1.  Sample size estimation for randomised controlled trials with repeated assessment of patient-reported outcomes: what correlation between baseline and follow-up outcomes should we assume?

Authors:  Stephen J Walters; Richard M Jacques; Inês Bonacho Dos Anjos Henriques-Cadby; Jane Candlish; Nikki Totton; Mica Teo Shu Xian
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2019-09-13       Impact factor: 2.279
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.