Smokeless tobacco use, birth weight, and gestational age: population based, prospective cohort study of 1217 women in Mumbai, India

BMJ 2010; 340 doi: (Published 10 May 2010) Cite this as: BMJ 2010;340:c2191

The authors of this 2004 research article by Prakash C Gupta and Sreevidya S [Subramoney] have alerted us to errors in the full, online version (BMJ 2004;328:1538, doi:10.1136/bmj.38113.687882.EB). In table 1 (about use of smokeless tobacco) some data for socioeconomic status, weight, and antenatal care were entered in the wrong rows. Thus, for socioeconomic status, the data for non-users and users are in fact as follows: middle class, 249 (27.4) and 80 (39.5) respectively; and lower class, 659 (72.6) and 122 (60.5) respectively. For weight, the data for non-users and users are: for the ≥50 kg group, 352 (38.8) and 64 (31.7) respectively; and for the <50 kg group, 556 (61.2) and 138 (68.3) respectively. For antenatal care, the data for non-users and users are: for ≥5 visits, 675 (74.3) and 137 (67.8) respectively; and for <5 visits, 233 (25.7) and 65 (32.2) respectively.

In the “Data analysis” section of the Methods, the second sentence of the second paragraph should read: “We excluded two smokers (of “bidis,” cigarettes hand rolled in a tendu leaf wrapper), eight women who gave birth to twins, 11 [not 21, as stated] who had abortions, 10 who had neonatal deaths [information not given in the original published text], and 26 with either no date of birth or only secondhand information from neighbours (during follow-up) from all analyses.”

The authors confirm that these errors do not affect the reported associations in the paper.

Additionally, the name of the second author of this article was published wrongly as Sreevidya S; the correct name is Sreevidya Subramoney.


Cite this as: BMJ 2010;340:c2191

View Abstract