Correction: Prognosis of extracolonic findings on clinical computed tomographic colonography: A single-center experience
Hideto Tomimatsu, Keita Fujimoto, Taketo Suto, Masayuki Matsuo
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
TopicsColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments · Diverticular Disease and Complications · Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
In the Abstract, there is an error in the sixth sentence. The correct sentence is: Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed worse prognosis for E4 (mean survival: 5.6 years) than for E1–E3 combined (10.1 years) (p < 0.0001).
In the Results section, there is an error in the sixth sentence of the third paragraph. The correct sentence is: None of the patients in the Past E2 or E3 categories required further examinations that necessitated changes to the treatment plan (mean OP for E2: 2,880 days; mean OP for E3: 2,976 days).
In the Results, there is an error in the third and seventh sentence of the fourth paragraph. The correct third sentence is: The hazard ratio for Past E4 (vs the combined Past E1–E3) was 8.2 (95% CI: 3.7–18.4). The correct seventh sentence is: The hazard ratio for Revised E4 (vs the combined Revised E1–E3) was 5.2 (95% CI: 2.4–11.2).
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.