Corrigendum: Assessing knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward sexually transmitted infections among Baghdad undergraduate students for research-guided sexual health education

Ghaith Al-Gburi^1*Ali Al-Shakarchi¹Jaafar D. Al-Dabagh¹Faris Lami²

• ¹College of Medicine, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq
• ²Department of community and family medicine, College of Medicine, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq

In the published article, there was an error. The proportion of participants who believed that HIV could be completely cured was reported as 32.9% in the text instead of the correct figure of 23.9%, which could be derived from Table 2. A correction has been made to [Results], [Knowledge of sexually transmitted infections]. This sentence previously stated:“These include: the availability of HIV vaccination (standing at 42% incorrect response rate), the non-curability of HIV infections (32.9%), …”The corrected sentence appears below:“These include: the availability of HIV vaccination (standing at 42% incorrect response rate), the non-curability of HIV infections (23.9%), …”In the published article, there was an error. The proportion of participants who believed that HIV is a non-curable infection was reported as 67.1% in the text instead of 76.1%, which could be derived from Table 2.A correction has been made to the [Discussion], Paragraph 3. This sentence previously stated:“As for other HIV items, only 58% of respondents correctly identified the unavailability of a vaccine, and 67.1% correctly identified HIV as a non-curable infection.”The corrected sentence appears below:“As for other HIV items, only 58% of respondents correctly identified the unavailability of a vaccine, and 76.1% correctly identified HIV as a non-curable infection.”The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.In the published article, there was an error in Table 2 as published. The “c” superscript denoting “No” as the correct answer was not placed for two items: “Showering before and after sex” and “contraceptive pill”. The corrected Table 2 and its caption “Knowledge about sexually transmitted infections among non-medical undergraduates in Baghdad, Iraq” appear below.The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.In the published article, there was missing information. Effect size indices were not reported for Tables B1, C2, D1. This information is now included in Supplementary Table 1. For cases where equality of variance could be assumed, based on Levene’s test, the Cohen’s D index is reported. Alternatively, the mean difference was scaled by the square root of the average variance (instead of the pooled variance) as a more accurate indicator of the effect size (1). For both indices, a value of ≥0.2 signifies a small effect, ≥0.5 signifies a moderate effect, and ≥0.8 for a large effect.The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.In the published article, in Tables 2 – 4, a large number of hypothesis testing was performed simultaneously to test the association between each item and the three independent variables (gender, knowing someone who has been diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection, and previous sexual experience). To further strengthen statistical reporting, the Benjamin-Hochberg procedure could be utilised to adjust p-values for multiple testing and reduce the false discovery rate to 5% within each family of hypothesis tests (within each independent variable) (2). This information is now provided in supplementary tables 2-4, which also include the odds ratio as an index of effect size to improve the interpretability of the statistically significant associations. These supplementary analyses may not change the scientific conclusions of the study. However, they identify areas where more caution should be employed when discussing certain significant associations. Namely, the higher knowledge of the genital warts’ vaccine and the lower institutional stigma among female students, as well as the higher tendency for self-medication with over-the-counter drugs among those who knew someone with a sexually transmitted infection. Future studies should place higher emphasis on investigating these associations in depth, as they cannot be established with certainty based on these adjustments.The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.