Correction: Development of a clinical diagnostic tool to differentiate multiple myeloma from bone metastasis in patients with destructive bone lesions (MM-BM DDx).

Correction: BMC Primary Care 21, 215 (2020)

10.1186/s12875-020-01283-x

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors identified some errors in the published equation on Table 2, the published Fig. 3 (the estimated odds and likelihood ratio were incorrect due to our mistake in specifying the equation within the calculator), and the discussion part (related to the figure) in the manuscript. The correction details are stated as follows:

Table 2

Multivariable fractional polynomial logistic regression model for diagnostic prediction of multiple myeloma. (imputed dataset with a total n = 586)

Predictor	Covariate transformation			ß	95% CI	P-value
	Terms	df	Formula
Intercept				-2.28	-2.63, -1.93	<0.001
Hemoglobin	Out	0	-	-	-	-
Log serum creatinine	Linear	1	Log creatinine-0.0237	1.28	0.80, 1.75	<0.001
Log serum globulin	Linear	4	Log globulin-0.5-0.8714	-92.64	-114.80, -70.49	<0.001
	FP2		Log globulin-0.5*Log (Log globulin)-0.2400	-48.14	-60.13, -36.15	<0.001
Log alkaline phosphatase	Linear	1	Log ALP-4.9318	-0.97	-1.38, -0.56	<0.001
Serum calcium	Out	0	-	-	-	-

Fig. 3

The web application interface of the MM-BM DDx model. Three clinical laboratory parameters can be used for prediction of the presence of multiple myeloma

Log (Log globulin) of the 4th entry under Formula column should not be superscripted.

Our previous equation embedded within the online web calculator was incorrect. After correction, the model estimated the predicted odds of MM at 0.436 with a positive likelihood ratio of 1.429 (suspected MM) (Fig. 3). Figure 3 was corrected accordingly. The suggestion in the following sentence was also corrected to follow the model’s estimates. The 9th and 10th sentence of the 3rd paragraph on page 9 should read:

The model predicted the odds of MM at 0.436 with a positive likelihood ratio of 1.429 (suspected MM) (Fig. 3). Based on that, this patient should have been considered for referral to a hematologist for further work-up and a definitive diagnosis.