Erratum to: Biofield Therapies: Helpful or Full of Hype? A Best Evidence Synthesis
Erratum to: Int.J. Behav. Med.
The original version of this article, which published in volume 17, issue 1 (Spring 2010), contained some errors in the text and online supplementary tables. The errors in the text are:
In the “Results” section, under the subheading “Hospitalized and Postoperative Patients,” the second sentence should read: “Five studies (four high quality and one low quality, using...” as opposed to “Six studies, (five high qualities and one low quality...”
In the “Results” section, under the subheading “Best Evidence Synthesis”, the first line of the second paragraph should read: “All 66 studies (separated by population/ailment studied) are presented in Tables 4a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h as electronic supplementary material.” (as opposed to “All 67 studies...”).
In the “Results” section, within the first paragraph of the second column on page 13, the sentence should read “It should be noted that of 66 studies....”, as opposed to “It should be ...
- Erratum to: Biofield Therapies: Helpful or Full of Hype? A Best Evidence Synthesis
International Journal of Behavioral Medicine
Volume 18, Issue 1 , pp 79-82
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links