Academic journal article Environmental Health Perspectives

Errata

Academic journal article Environmental Health Perspectives

Errata

Article excerpt

In the Abstract of their article "Estimating Water Supply Arsenic Levels in the New England Bladder Cancer Study" [Environ Health Perspect 119:1279-1285 (2011)], Nuckols et al. reported the following results:

  Three methods accounted for 93% of the residential estimates of
  arsenic concentration: direct measurement of water samples (27%;
  median, 0.3 ug/L; range, 0.1-11.5), statistical models of water
  utility measurement data (49%; median, 0.4 ug/L; range, 0.3-3.3),
  and statistical models of arsenic concentrations in wells using
  aquifers in New England (17%; median, 1.6 ug/L; range, 0.6-22.4).

The authors have revised the measurements using a more accurate method for calculating the median (weighted by person-years) and for reporting the range (25th-95th percentile) based on the values reported in Table 1 of the article, which are correct. The revised measurements are as follows:

  Three methods accounted for 93% of the residential estimates of
  arsenic concentration: direct measurement of water samples (27%
  EY; median weighted by person-years = 0.3 ug/L; 25--95th percentile
  range: 0.1-20.7 ug/L), statistical models of water utility measurement
  data (49% EY; weighted median 0.4 ug/L; range, 0. … 
Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.