Correction: Longitudinal strain correlates with 6-minute walk distance whereas ejection fraction and diastolic parameters do not
John W. Petersen, Natalie Bracewell, Kevin M. Schneider, Joshua Latner, Shuang Yang, Yi Guo
Abstract
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors · Cardiovascular Disease and Adiposity · Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Correction: Cardiovasc Ultrasound 22, 6 (2024).
10.1186/s12947-024-00325-z.
Following publication of the original article [1], the authors identified an error in Table 3. For Long. Strain Inferior LV segments, it was published as correlation estimate of -0.035 with p value 0.792. The correct correlation estimate is -0.323 with p value 0.013).
The correct Table 3 is given below.
Table 3. Correlation of measures of global and regional longitudinal strain with 6-minute walk distanceCorrelation with 6-minute walk distance N Correlation Estimate^a^p Value^a^ Global Long. Strain 58-0.312 0.017
Long. Strain Basal LV segments 58-0.359 0.006
Long. Strain Mid LV segments 58-0.2090.115 Long. Strain Apical LV segments 58-0.2540.054 Long. Strain Anteroseptal LV seg. 56-0.2020.136 Long. Strain Anterior LV segments 58-0.321 0.014
Long. Strain Anterolateral LV seg. 58-0.292 0.026
Long. Strain Inferolateral LV seg. 57-0.2590.051 Long. Strain Inferior LV segments 58-0.323 0.013
Long. Strain Inferoseptal LV seg. 58-0.2520.057
The original article has been corrected.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.