In the published article, there was an error in Figure 3 as published. For the study in the 2nd row and Totals in the 4th row of the figure, the numerator values, denominator values, point estimates, and confidence intervals were not correct. The corrected Figure and its caption appear below.
In the published article, there were errors in those text passages that stated data values based on Figure 3. The following corrections have been made:
Figure 3
A correction has been made to the Abstract Results paragraph.
This sentence previously stated:
“With the application of Bayes' theorem, the corresponding probabilities indicated that, when present, occult AF in patients with CS is causal in 38.2% (95% CI, 0–63.6%) of patients.”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“With the application of Bayes' theorem, the corresponding probabilities indicated that, when present, occult AF in patients with CS is causal in 41.2% (95% CI, 15.5–77.7%) of patients.”
A correction has been made to the Abstract Conclusion paragraph.
This sentence previously stated:
“Current evidence is preliminary, but it indicates that in cryptogenic stroke when occult AF is found, it is causal in about 38.2% of patients.”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“Current evidence is preliminary, but it indicates that in cryptogenic stroke when occult AF is found, it is causal in about 41.2% of patients.”
A correction has been made to Results, 5th paragraph.
This sentence previously stated:
“The summary estimate derived from all three studies indicated that when present among patients with cryptogenic stroke, occult AF is causal in 38.2% (95% CI, 0–63.6%).”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“The summary estimate derived from all three studies indicated that when present among patients with cryptogenic stroke, occult AF is causal in 41.2% (95% CI, 15.5–77.7%).”
A correction has been made to Results, 5th paragraph.
This sentence previously stated:
“Combining the rate of occult AF presence in patients with CS across all series (14.9%) and the frequency with which the detected occult AF is statistically deemed causal (38.2%) projects that occult AF accounts for 5.7% of all cryptogenic strokes (attributable risk).”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“Combining the rate of occult AF presence in patients with CS across all series (14.9%) and the frequency with which the detected occult AF is statistically deemed causal (41.2%) projects that occult AF accounts for 6.1% of all cryptogenic strokes (attributable risk).”
A correction has been made to Discussion, 1st paragraph.
This sentence previously stated:
“Findings indicated that when identified in patients with CS, occult AF is causally related to the index stroke in 38% and incidental in 62%.”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“Findings indicated that when identified in patients with CS, occult AF is causally related to the index stroke in 41% and incidental in 59%.”
A correction has been made to Discussion, 1st paragraph.
This sentence previously stated:
“Given the frequency with which occult AF is detected among patients with CS, the results suggest that occult AF is an important mechanism of CS, accounting for 1 in 17 of all cases of CS, including 1 in 16 cases in patients under the age of 65 years, and 1 in 18 cases in patients who are 65 years and older.”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“Given the frequency with which occult AF is detected among patients with CS, the results suggest that occult AF is an important mechanism of CS, accounting for 1 in 16 of all cases of CS, including 1 in 16 cases in patients under the age of 65 years, and 1 in 18 cases in patients who are 65 years and older.”
A correction has been made to Materials and Methods, subsection Probability of causal vs. incidental, paragraph 1.
This sentence previously stated:
“Probability occult AF is incidental in CS cases = (Prevalence of occult AF in controls) × (1 – Prevalence of occult AF in CS cases) (Prevalence of occult AF in CS cases) × (1 – Prevalence of occult AF in controls)”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“Probability occult AF is incidental in CS cases = [(Prevalence of occult AF in controls) × (1 – Prevalence of occult AF in CS cases)] ÷ [(Prevalence of occult AF in CS cases) × (1 – Prevalence of occult AF in controls)]”
The authors apologize for these errors and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Statements
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Summary
Keywords
cryptogenic stroke, atrial fibrillation, cardiac monitoring, attributable risk, diagnosis, epidemiology
Citation
Chaisinanunkul N, Khurshid S, Buck BH, Rabinstein AA, Anderson CD, Hill MD, Fugate JE and Saver JL (2023) Corrigendum: How often is occult atrial fibrillation in cryptogenic stroke causal vs. incidental? A meta-analysis. Front. Neurol. 14:1206563. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1206563
Received
15 April 2023
Accepted
27 April 2023
Published
10 May 2023
Approved by
Robin Lemmens, University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium
Volume
14 - 2023
Updates
Copyright
© 2023 Chaisinanunkul, Khurshid, Buck, Rabinstein, Anderson, Hill, Fugate and Saver.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Jeffrey L. Saver jsaver@mednet.ucla.edu
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.