A major correction has been posted for an update to international guidelines on reporting outcomes of people receiving cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).
Circulation published the paper online in 2014; the correction was issued before it appeared in print, in the journal’s September 29, 2015 issue. “When reviewing the final proof for print publication, the author noticed some errors and requested changes,” according to a spokesperson for the journal’s publisher, the American Heart Association.
The notice is so long, we’re only including the first paragraph, most of which is taken up by just the title of the paper:
In the article by Perkins et al, “Cardiac Arrest and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Outcome Reports: Update of the Utstein Resuscitation Registry Templates for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From a Task Force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (American Heart Association, European Resuscitation Council, Australian and New Zealand Council on Resuscitation, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, InterAmerican Heart Foundation, Resuscitation Council of Southern Africa, Resuscitation Council of Asia); and the American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee and the Council on Cardiopulmonary, Critical Care, Perioperative and Resuscitation,” which published ahead of print November 11, 2014, and appears in the September 29, 2015, issue of the journal (Circulation. 2015;132:1286-1300. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000144), several corrections have been made to the print version.
The correction lists 10 sets of changes, with some sets including multiple fixes. Changes included replacing images, adding missing headings to tables, and making multiple wording changes. So we’re dubbing this a “mega-correction.”
The consensus statement comes from the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, a group of doctors from cardiac health groups around the world, including the AHA, that work to create global standards for CPR.
It has been cited 503 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. It was also copublished by Resuscitation.
The last update was published by both journals in 2004.
Carrie Thacker, the director of communications at the AHA, told us:
The correction notice includes addition of links to supplemental online resources and formatting and spelling changes made to the manuscript between online and print publication. The corrections were identified during typeset and confirmed with the writing group chair as the manuscript was prepared for print publication.
She acknowledged that one author instigated the changes, but declined to identify the author.
We’ve contacted corresponding author Vinay Nadkarni and we’ll update with any reply.
Hat tip: Kerry Grens
Like Retraction Watch? Consider making a tax-deductible contribution to support our growth. You can also follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, and sign up on our homepage for an email every time there’s a new post. Click here to review our Comments Policy.
The final proof had this many errors? How many did it have to begin with? Why would anyone read this journal?