Several errors occurred in this paper by Williams and others (13 March 1999, pp 693-8). Because earlier versions of the figures were inadvertently submitted with the final manuscript, some of the data are incorrect. Figure 1 should have shown that 42 [not 41] infants who received iron supplemented formula milk remained in the study. Figures 2 and 3 should have shown that, due to missing data, comparative studies were carried out on 38 pairs of observations [not individual] in infants receiving unmodified cows' milk; correct versions of figures 2 and 3 appear below. In the results section of the abstract the 95% confidence intervals for personal and social scores should have read 1.2 to 16.8 [not −5.4 to 17.2]. The conclusions remain unchanged.
Changes in Griffiths general quotient score between enrolment and 24 months of age in infants receiving unmodified cows' milk or iron supplemented formula milk









CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Ventilator associated pneumonia
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Restless legs syndrome
Published 30 May 2012
Author's reply
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Full access to trial data holds many benefits and a few pitfalls, conference hears
Published 30 May 2012
Restless Legs Syndrome: Fact or Fiction
Published 30 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 15:42
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27