Curtin University Homepage
  • Library
  • Help
    • Admin

    espace - Curtin’s institutional repository

    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
    View Item 
    • espace Home
    • espace
    • Curtin Research Publications
    • View Item
    • espace Home
    • espace
    • Curtin Research Publications
    • View Item

    Correction: RESPECT-ED: Rates of Pulmonary Emboli (PE) and sub-segmental PE with modern computed tomographic pulmonary angiograms in emergency departments: A multi-center observational study finds significant yield variation, uncorrelated with use or small PE rates (PLoS ONE (2016) 11:12 (e0166483) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166483)

    Access Status
    Fulltext not available
    Authors
    Mountain, D.
    Keijzers, G.
    Chu, K.
    Joseph, A.
    Read, C.
    Blecher, G.
    Furyk, J.
    Bharat, C.
    Velusamy, K.
    Munro, A.
    Baker, K.
    Kinnear, F.
    Mukherjee, A.
    Watkins, G.
    Buntine, P.
    Livesay, G.
    Fatovich, Daniel
    Date
    2017
    Type
    Journal Article
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Citation
    Mountain, D. and Keijzers, G. and Chu, K. and Joseph, A. and Read, C. and Blecher, G. and Furyk, J. et al. 2017. Correction: RESPECT-ED: Rates of Pulmonary Emboli (PE) and sub-segmental PE with modern computed tomographic pulmonary angiograms in emergency departments: A multi-center observational study finds significant yield variation, uncorrelated with use or small PE rates (PLoS ONE (2016) 11:12 (e0166483) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166483). PLoS ONE. 12 (8).
    Source Title
    PLoS ONE
    DOI
    10.1371/journal.pone.0184219
    ISSN
    1932-6203
    School
    School of Nursing, Midwifery and Paramedicine
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/73312
    Collection
    • Curtin Research Publications
    Abstract

    © 2017 Mountain et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Although there are multiple corrections to both formatting and some content in Tables and Figures, and some minor changes to reported results and analysis, none of these corrections alter any major findings, discussions or conclusions from the initial study. There are a number of errors in Table 2. Row M should appear after Row L. The values in the column “Adult ED patients during study” are incorrect. “ED Admits during study (%)*” values are incorrect in rows B, C, E, F, and L. “CTPA (n) per site” values are incorrect in rows C, E, H, K, L, M, and N. The “CTPA/ 1000 ED admits” and “CTPA +ve for PA /1000 adults$” values in row L are incorrect. Please see the corrected Table 2 below. Totals and means have been recalculated, as necessary. There are multiple errors in Table 3. The “Large PE n as (%) +ve CTPA” values are incorrectly duplicated for the “Small PE n as (%) of +ve CTPA” values in rows D, E, F, G, H, and N. The “Totals (95%CI)” value in the column “SSPE n as (%) of +ve CTPA” is incorrectly duplicated in the “Small PE n as (%) of +ve CTPA” column. “Totals (95%CI)” in column “Yield % +ve PE” is incorrect. There are minor discrepancies throughout the table in comparison to the source data. Please see the corrected Table 3 below. Totals and means have been recalculated, as necessary. Fig 3 contains two data point errors. Please see the corrected Fig 3 here. There are a number of errors throughout the article. In the Abstract, the first sentence of the Results section should read: Fourteen radiology departments (15 ED) provided 7075 CTPA data (94% =64-slice CT); PE were reported in 1033 (yield 14.6% (95%CI 13.8–15.4%; range 9.3–25.3%; site variation p <0.0001) with four sites significantly below and one above the 15.3% target. The first two sentences of the “Site demographics /characteristics” section of the Results should read: Fourteen reporting sites (but 15 EDs, as two ED had centralised reporting as a single unit) provided consecutive data for 7075 ED ordered CTPAs. Numbers ranged from 324 to 1056 CTPA per site, over 8 months to 2 year periods (from 01/2012 to 02/2015), with the exception of site F which provided consecutive data from twelve years of CTPA use (from 2002), due to lower usage rates in a smaller adult ED population. The second paragraph of the same section should read: Of the 7062 CTPA with complete demographic data, 3870 were performed in females (54.8% vs 45.2% males), p<0.001 for difference of 9.6% (CI 7.95–11.25%)) and the mean age was 60.0 years (CI 59.6–60.4, SD 16.6). Yield was significantly lower amongst females (12.1%; CI 11.3–12.9%) than males (17.6%; CI 16.7–18.5%); p < 0.0001 for difference in proportions. The mean age of those with a positive scan was 61.5 (SD = 15.6) vs. 59.7 (SD = 16.7) years for negative scans (p <0.001 for difference). The paragraph of the “SSPE/ small PE.” section of the Results should read: Table 3 and Fig 1. SSPE (isolated or multiple) were 8.8% (CI 7.1–10.5%) of all diagnosed PE with prevalence ranging from 2.0 to 15.9% of diagnosed PE, with only three marginally significant differences on pairwise comparisons. Variation in small PE prevalence ranged from 10.8 vs 21.1% and no comparisons were significantly different. Variation in the rates of diagnosed SSPE as a proportion of all CTPA’s performed ranged from 0.2–2.5% between sites, and small PE from 1.0% to 3.4%. Some differences were marginally significant but consistent with expected statistical variation when performing multiple comparisons. The last sentence in the “Other potentially important correlations/ associations” section of the Results should read: There was however a positive linear correlation (r = 0.822, p = <0.001) between rates of CTPA usage and rates of PE diagnosed per 1000 adult attendances. The first sentence of the second paragraph in the “Key findings” section of the Discussion should read: The overall proportion of SSPE was 8.8%, ranging from 2.0–15.9% of all PE diagnosed, but the more inclusive small PE grouping found no significant variation (10.2–21.1%). The fourth sentence of the “Comparison of key findings with previous literature” section of the Discussion should read: Our study found yields occasionally dropped just below 10% (2/14 sites), but 50% of sites had yields below the suggested UK target of 15.3%, with an overall population yield of 14.6% (upper CI:15.4%).

    Related items

    Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.

    • Burden of disease and benefits of exercise in fixed airway obstruction asthma
      Turner, Sian Elizabeth (2009)
      Background and research questions. The characterization of chronic persistent asthma in an older adult population is not well defined. This is due to the difficulties in separating the diagnosis of asthma from that of ...
    • Evaluation of ambiguity success rates based on multi-frequency GPS and Galileo
      Arora, Balwinder Singh (2012)
      The precise positioning applications have long been carried out using dual frequency carrier phase and code observables from the Global Positioning System (GPS). The carrier phase observables are very precise in comparison ...
    • An evidence-based model for determining treatment dosages in therapeutic ultrasound using thermometry: an in-vitro investigation using post-mortem pig tissues
      Goh, Ah Cheng (2003)
      The aim of this study was to clarify the relationship between the dosage parameters and temperature increase at the target tissues (up to 5 cm below the skin surface), and to explore the possibility of proposing a preliminary ...
    Advanced search

    Browse

    Communities & CollectionsIssue DateAuthorTitleSubjectDocument TypeThis CollectionIssue DateAuthorTitleSubjectDocument Type

    My Account

    Admin

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Follow Curtin

    • 
    • 
    • 
    • 
    • 

    CRICOS Provider Code: 00301JABN: 99 143 842 569TEQSA: PRV12158

    Copyright | Disclaimer | Privacy statement | Accessibility

    Curtin would like to pay respect to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander members of our community by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land on which the Perth campus is located, the Whadjuk people of the Nyungar Nation; and on our Kalgoorlie campus, the Wongutha people of the North-Eastern Goldfields.