Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Corrections

doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318258b1f3
Departments: Corrections
Free

An incorrect grant number was reported in “Breast Carcinoma in Young Women” by P.S. Simmons, Y.L. Jayasinghe, L.E. Wold, and L.J. Melton III (Obstet Gynecol 2011;118:529–36). On page 529, the second paragraph in the footnote incorrectly reads: “Supported in part by Research Grant AR 36582 from the National Institutes of Health, U.S. Public Health Service, and the Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Mayo Clinic Rochester.” The correct paragraph is: “Supported in part by Research Grant AG034676 from the National Institutes of Health, U.S. Public Health Service, and the Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Mayo Clinic Rochester.” The authors regret this error.

Incorrect positive predictive values and negative predictive values were reported in “Role of Second-Trimester Uterine Artery Doppler in Assessing Stillbirth Risk” by T. Singh, K. Leslie, A. Bhide, F. D'Antonio, and B. Thilaganathan (Obstet Gynecol 2012;119:256–61).

  • On page 256 in the Abstract, Results section, the incorrect sentence reads, “The positive predictive and negative predictive values for the 90th percentile uterine artery Doppler cutoff were 0.46% and 95.73%, respectively.” The correct sentence is, “The positive predictive and negative predictive values for the 90th percentile uterine artery Doppler cutoff were 3.79% and 99.46%, respectively.”
  • On page 258 in the first column, the incorrect sentence reads, “The positive predictive and negative predictive values for the 90th percentile uterine artery Doppler cutoff were 0.46% and 95.73%, respectively.” The correct sentence is, “The positive predictive and negative predictive values for the 90th percentile uterine artery Doppler cutoff were 3.79% and 99.46%, respectively.”

The authors regret these errors.

© 2012 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.