Correction to: Optimising diagnostics for hard-of-hearing infants: factors associated with successful MRI scanning without general anaesthesia
Marlise D. van der Veen, Ithri Kaman, Bas Jasperse, Thadé Goderie, Fenna A. Ebbens, K. Mariam Slot, Marjo S. van der Knaap, Paul Merkus
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
TopicsAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research · Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research · Airway Management and Intubation Techniques
Correction to: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
10.1007/s00405-024-09118-6
In this article, few values were incorrectly published and it should have been as in this correction.
- In the results section of the Abstract, the sentence ***“***For MRI CPA the odds of success decreased for infants aged 3–5 months, compared to infants under 2 months (respectively 84.6% and 48.1%, p = 0.009).” should have been “For MRI CPA the odds of success decreased for infants aged 3–5 months, compared to infants under 3 months (respectively 48.1% and 84.6%, p = 0.009).”
- In the Results section,*** under “Factors associated with success of MRI CPA***”, the sentences ***“***The results show a decrease in the odds of success for children aged 3 to 5 months (48.1% success), compared to children of 2 months or younger (81.5% success, p = 0.010). Female patients were more often successfully scanned than male patients, with success percentages of 80.8% and 50% respectively (p = 0.018).” should have been “The results show a decrease in the odds of success for children aged 3 to 5 months (48.1% success), compared to children of 2 months or younger (84.6% success, p = 0.008). Female patients were more often successfully scanned than male patients, with success percentages of 80.8% and 51.9% respectively (p = 0.031).”
- In the Discussion section, the sentence ***“***In this retrospective study we have demonstrated the feasibility of successfully obtaining MRI scans of the head of infants without general anaesthesia using the feed-and-swaddle technique, with an overall success rate of 76.1%.” should have been “In this retrospective study we have demonstrated the feasibility of successfully obtaining MRI scans of the head of infants without general anaesthesia using the feed-and-swaddle technique, with an overall success rate of 75.9%.”
- In the Conclusion section, the sentence ***“***The overall success rate for MRI of the head without anaesthesia for infants under 6 months was 76.1%.” should have been “The overall success rate for MRI of the head without anaesthesia for infants under 6 months was 75.9%.”
The original article has been corrected.