Advertisement
Journal of Clinical Oncology  
Search for:
Limit by:
  Browse by Subject or Issue
Home Search or Browse JCO My JCO Subscriptions Customer Service Site Map

Erratum for Malin et al., J Clin Oncol 24 (4) 626-634.

Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 24, No 12 (April 20), 2006: pp. 1966-a
© 2006 American Society of Clinical Oncology.
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2006.03.001

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Save to my personal folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content

ERRATUM

The February 1, 2006, article by Malin et al entitled, "Results of the National Initiative for Cancer Care Quality: How Can We Improve the Quality of Cancer Care in the United States?" (J Clin Oncol 24:626-633, 2006) contained errors.

Table 3 misattributed the results for the following components of care: Timing, Receipt of treatment, Technical quality of treatment, and Respect for patient preferences. The corrected table has been reprinted in its entirety online. Correspondingly, in the Results section, the last sentence under the Quality of Care heading should have read, "Adherence to recommended care across the different components of care ranged from 57% (95% CI, 53% to 62%) for Respect for patient preferences and 59% (95% CI, 91% to 94%) for Referral to 93% (95% CI, 91% to 94%) for Pathology."

Tables 5 and 6 reported the unweighted results for individual MSA adherence rates, but should have given the weighted results for overall adherence and by MSA. The corrected tables have been reprinted in their entirety online. Correspondingly, in the Results section, the third sentence in the second paragraph under the Variation in Quality of Care Across NICCQ MSAs heading should have read, "For example, among patients treated with chemotherapy, the planned dose was consistent with published regimens for 58% of patients; however, this ranged from 29% to 74%, when weighted for hospital and patient nonresponse (P < .001)."

The online version has been corrected in departure from the print.





This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Save to my personal folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content

About
JCO
 Editorial
Roster
 Advertising
Information
 Librarians &
Institutions
 Rights &
Permissions
 PDA Services

Copyright © 2006 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
Terms and Conditions of Use
  HighWire Press HighWire Press™ assists in the publication of JCO Online