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  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

JAMA. 2003;289:987.

Incorrect Data in Tables and Figures. In the Original Contribution entitled "Early and Sustained Dual Oral Antiplatelet Therapy Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention" published in the November 20, 2002, issue of THE JOURNAL (2002;288:2411-2420), there were incorrect numbers in several tables and figures. In Table 1 on page 2414, the data for statin use should have read 563 (53.5%) for clopidogrel and 609 (57.3%) for placebo, with a P value of .08. In the top half (1-year data) of Table 3 on page 2417, numbers of clopidogrel patients for CABG and non-CABG bleeding should have read 63 and 18, respectively. In the bottom half (28-day data) of Table 3, data for any major bleeding should have read 50 (4.7%) for clopidogrel and 38 (3.6%) for placebo, with a P value of .19. Data for nonprocedural major bleeding should have read 3 (0.3%) for placebo, with a P value of .62. Data for procedural major bleeding should have read 49 (4.7%) for clopidogrel and 35 (3.3%) for placebo, with a P value of .11. Data for any minor bleeding should have read 33 (3.1%) for clopidogrel and 24 (2.3%) for placebo, with a P value of .23. Data for procedural minor bleeding should have read 30 (2.9%) for clopidogrel and 23 (2.2%) for placebo, with a P value of .33.

In Table 4 on page 2418, for the outcomes of death or MI, clopidogrel data should have been 84 (8.0%). For the outcome of MI, clopidogrel data should have read 70 (6.6%), placebo should have read 90 (8.5%), and the RRR (95% CI) should have been 21.7 (-7.1 to 42.7). For stroke, placebo should have read 12 (1.1%) and the RRR (95% CI) should have been 25.0 (-77.9 to 68.4). Under "revascularization," any TVR data should have read 139 (13.2%) for clopidogrel, 144 (13.5%) for placebo, and the RRR (95% CI) should have been 3.2 (-22.2 to 23.3). Data for any revascularization should have read 225 (21.4%) for clopidogrel and the RRR (95% CI) should have been -1.6 (-22.3 to 15.5).

In Figure 3, panel B, the number of patients for ACS "yes" should have been 583 and the RRR (95% CI) should have been 34.6 (63.4 to -16.9). In Figure 5, the number of patients for ACS "yes" should have been 1408 and the RRR (95% CI) should have been 27.5 (47.8 to -0.6).

None of these corrections substantively affects the results or conclusions of the article.

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