Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Erratum
  • Open Access

Erratum to: Does artificial nutrition improve outcome of critical illness

  • 1Email author,
  • 1 and
  • 1
Critical Care201317:413

https://doi.org/10.1186/cc12509

  • Published:

The original article was published in Critical Care 2013 17:302

Correction

After publication of their article [1], the authors noticed two errors in their viewpoint.

On page 4 under the subheading "Recent randomized controlled trials", the text currently reads "However, both ICU and hospital stays were shorter in the tight-calorie group, clearly introducing the statistical problem of informative censoring/competing risk that we discussed earlier." The ICU and hospital stays are in fact longer in the tight-calorie group, and this statement should therefore read "However, both ICU and hospital stays were longer in the tight-calorie group, clearly introducing the statistical problem of informative censoring/competing risk that we discussed earlier."

On page 5 also under the subheading "Recent randomized controlled trials", the text currently reads "The EN amount did not differ between groups and reached ±50% of target at day 7." In fact, the EN amount reached ±20% of target at day 7, and this statement should therefore read "The EN amount did not differ between groups and reached ±20% of target at day 7."

Notes

Declarations

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, B3000 Leuven, Belgium

References

  1. Schetz M, Casaer MP, Van den Berghe: Does artificial nutrition improve outcome of critical illness?. Critical Care. 2013, 17: 302-10.1186/cc11828.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© BioMed Central Ltd 2013

Advertisement