Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(2)
Exact(2)
Chemical retention calculations have been corrected in Table 1[1].
Since the online publication of this article the following has been corrected in Table 1, "3.Oil.51" has been changed to "3.0±1.51.
Similar(58)
Corrections have been made from the original manuscript published online: Criteria for identifying results showing "substantial trends" has been clarified; the number of studies has been corrected in the text; and the "effect direction" for relevant studies has been corrected in Tables 1, 3, and 5.
The unit has been corrected in Table 1 (nA everywhere).
These recommendations have been corrected in the table below.
This error has been corrected in a revised Table 1 included in this erratum.
Table 2 has been corrected in the original article and is also included correctly below.
Current database annotation should, however, be corrected in some points (see Table 1 and Additional file for details).
All the figures indicating the tandem repeat number at the MIRU 20, i.e. the fifth digit of the VNTR profile from the left end of the set of digits, should be corrected in the text and correct information is provided in the revised Table 1.
Because of differences due to rounding in earlier analyses, values for RERI, OR, and 95% CI were incorrect in the "Abstract" and the text of the original manuscript published online but were correct in Table 4.
It has been corrected here (in the text and in Tables 1, 4, and 5).
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com