Obstetrics & Gynecology:
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000249
Departments: Corrections

Correction

Free Access

In “Short Ultrasonographic Cervical Length in Women With Low-Risk Obstetric History” by F. L. Facco and H. N. Simhan (Obstet Gynecol 2013;122:858–62), two errors have been identified:

* In the abstract’s Methods, the incorrect sentence reads, “The relationship between cervical length (measured between 22 and 22 6/7 weeks of gestation) and preterm birth was examined using logistic regression.” The correct sentence is, “The relationship between cervical length (measured between 22 and 24 6/7 weeks of gestation) and preterm birth was examined using logistic regression.”

* In the last paragraph of the Materials and Methods section, the incorrect sentence reads, “For each subgroup, the relationship between cervical length (measured between 22 and 22 6/7 weeks of gestation), as a continuous variable, and preterm birth was examined using logistic regression.” The correct sentence is, “For each subgroup, the relationship between cervical length (measured between 22 and 24 6/7 weeks of gestation), as a continuous variable, and preterm birth was examined using logistic regression.”

The authors regret these errors.

In “Two Low-Dose Levonorgestrel Intrauterine Contraceptive Systems: A Randomized Controlled Trial” by Anita Nelson, D. Apter, B. Hauck, T. Schmelter, and S. Rybowski (Obstet Gynecol 2013;122:1205–13), explanations were missing for parts C and D in the legend for Figure 2. The correct figure legend is: “A) Mean number of bleeding or spotting days by 30-day reference period during the first year of 13.5 mg levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive system use. B) Mean number of bleeding or spotting days by 30-day reference period during the first year of 19.5 mg levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive system use. C) Mean number of bleeding or spotting days by 90-day reference period during 3 years of 13.5 mg levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive system use. D) Mean number of bleeding or spotting days by 90-day reference period during 3 years of 19.5 mg levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive system use.”

In “Second Stage of Labor and Epidural Use: A Larger Effect Than Previously Suggested” by Y. W. Cheng, B. L. Shaffer, J. M. Nicholson and A. B. Caughey (Obstet Gynecol 2014;123:527–35), the second paragraph of the Results section on page 529 contains an error. The second sentence in this paragraph reads, “When we examined the length of labor in nulliparous women with and without epidural at the 95th percentile threshold, it was 197 minutes with epidural and 336 minutes without epidural.” The correct sentence is, “When we examined the length of labor in nulliparous women with and without epidural at the 95th percentile threshold, it was 336 minutes with epidural and 197 minutes without epidural.” The authors regret this error.

© 2014 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Login

Article Tools

Share