You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 280 No. 7, August 19, 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Correction
 This Article
 •PDF of this Correction
 •Original article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Neurology
 •Alzheimer Disease
 •Behavioral Neurology
 •Dementias
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Clarification of Data

JAMA. 1998;280:604.

Errors occurred in the presentation of data in the Caring for the Uninsured and Underinsured article entitled "Hunger in an Adult Patient Population," published in the April 15, 1998, issue of THE JOURNAL (1998;279:1211-1214). Values in Table 4 are correct but not accurately presented in the text. On page 1211, the eighth line of the "Results" section in the abstract should have read as follows: "Compared to those who had never received food stamps or had no reduction in food stamps, recipients whose food stamps had been eliminated or reduced were more likely to report not having enough food (10% vs 13% vs 18%, P=.006), not eating for a whole day (10% vs 16% vs 20%, P=.01), going hungry but not eating (11% vs 16% vs 20%, P=.08), and cutting down on the size of meals or skipping meals (20% vs 27% vs 33%, P=.01)." On page 1213, the last sentence in the first paragraph of the first column should have read as follows: "Compared to those who had never received food stamps or had no reductions in food stamps, half of the recipients with food stamp reductions reported worrying that their food would run out (29% vs 41% vs 53%, P<.001) or that their food did not last (21% vs 34% vs 45%, P<.001) and had obtained emergency food (17% vs 37% vs 48%, P<.001)."



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1998 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.