Correction: Comment on “Does the 5-2-1 criteria identify patients with advanced Parkinson’s disease? Real-world screening accuracy and burden of 5-2-1-positive patients in 7 countries”
Harmen R. Moes, Erik Buskens, Teus van Laar
Abstract
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
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
TopicsParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Correction: BMC Neurol 24, 189 (2024)
10.1186/s12883-024-03692-2
Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported that the reference details to Antonini et al., 2024 (the other commentary in Matters Arising) are not correct. The correct details of the reference should be “Antonini A., Chaudhuri K.R., Domingos J., Jimenez-Shahed J., Wright J., Yan C.H., Alobaidi A., Bergmann L., Onuk K., Harmer L. and Malaty I. A. Response to letter to the editor regarding “Does the 5-2-1 criteria identify patients with advanced Parkinson’s disease? Real-world screening accuracy and burden of 5-2-1-positive patients in 7 countries”. BMC Neurology. 2024. 10.1186/s12883-024-03691-3”.
The original article [1] has been updated.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.