Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
After review of the data it appears that the authors accidentally miscoded several points in the data set, which have resulted in an error in the published article (BMJ Open 2011;1:e000311. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000311). In the abstract the year used to retrieve age standardised incidence and mortality rates was the 2008 and not 2007 dataset (the correct year is mentioned in the methods section and in the references), and the number of countries was 88 (as appears in the appendix) and not 87. The Pearson correlation between prostate cancer incidence in nations' world-wide and oral contraceptive use was 0.58 and not 0.61. The Pearson correlation between prostate cancer incidence in Europe and oral contraceptive use was 0.59 and not 0.55. Prostate cancer incidence correlated with condom use in nations worldwide (r=0.48) but not in Europe or by continent. Figure 1A,B have been corrected. In the multivariable mode the adjusted estimates for the association of oral contraceptive use with prostate cancer incidence is 0.65 (95% CI 0.3 to 1.01), p=0.001 (not 1.06 (95% CI 0.58 to 1.6)). Table 1 has been corrected. The correlation of prostate cancer mortality rates with oral contraceptive use was not statistically significant (r=0.16, p=0.1 not 0.53, p<0.05). Figure 2 has been changed. With hindsight, after correcting the data and the analysis, the title of the manuscript would have been less easily misinterpreted if it had been: ‘Oral contraceptive use is associated with prostate cancer incidence: an ecologic study’.