Published on in Vol 18, No 5 (2016): May

Correction: Online Alcohol Assessment and Feedback for Hazardous and Harmful Drinkers: Findings From the AMADEUS-2 Randomized Controlled Trial of Routine Practice in Swedish Universities

Correction: Online Alcohol Assessment and Feedback for Hazardous and Harmful Drinkers: Findings From the AMADEUS-2 Randomized Controlled Trial of Routine Practice in Swedish Universities

Correction: Online Alcohol Assessment and Feedback for Hazardous and Harmful Drinkers: Findings From the AMADEUS-2 Randomized Controlled Trial of Routine Practice in Swedish Universities

Corrigenda and Addenda

1Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden

2Department of Computer Science, University of Linköping, Linköping, Sweden

3Cambridge Institute of Public Health, MRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, United Kingdom

4Faculty of Science, Department of health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, United Kingdom

*these authors contributed equally

Corresponding Author:

Preben Bendtsen, PhD

Department of Medical and Health Sciences

Linköping University

Campus US

Linköping, 581 83

Sweden

Phone: 46 702324615

Fax:46 702324615

Email: preben.bendtsen@liu.se



The authors of the paper “Online Alcohol Assessment and Feedback for Hazardous and Harmful Drinkers: Findings From the AMADEUS-2 Randomized Controlled Trial of Routine Practice in Swedish Universities” (J Med Internet Res 2015;17(7):e170) used the wrong variable for the number of email reminders before participants answered the follow-up. In Table 2, the values in columns two, three, and four under the subcategory "Number of follow-up emails before response, n (%)" should read as in the table below. A footnote has also been added to the P-value associated with this variable. In the Results section, there remains no statistically significant association between the primary outcome and the number of email reminders (P=.16), consistent with the missing at random (MAR) assumption. However, analyses using the repeated attempts model and linear regression suggested an intervention effect of an 11% reduction (18% reduction to 3% reduction) and a statistically significant departure from the MAR assumption. The authors are unable to explain why this result contradicts the above analysis that uses the same variables, so they prefer to trust the simpler model and hence they do not regard the repeated attempts model findings as providing any strong evidence against the MAR assumption. This error has been corrected in the online version of the paper on the JMIR website on May 16, 2016 together with publishing this correction notice. A correction notice has been sent to PubMed and PubMed Central.

Table 2. Comparison of groups at follow-up (total n=931 without University of Gävle).
Number of follow-up emails before response, n (%)Intervention (n=402)Control (n=529)P-value
1222 (55.2)315 (59.6).07 a
282 (20.4)103 (19.5)
351 (12.7)70 (13.2)
427 (6.7)23 (4.3)
520 (5.0)18 (3.4)

aTrend test.

Edited by G Eysenbach; This is a non–peer-reviewed article. submitted 06.03.16; accepted 08.03.16; published 16.05.16

Copyright

©Preben Bendtsen, Marcus Bendtsen, Nadine Karlsson, Ian R White, Jim McCambridge. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 16.05.2016.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.