Erratum

After publication of this research article [1], we noted an error in Table 2. The values reported under Patient Age had been erroneously inverted, meaning age range “0-21” displayed the value for “57+” and vice versa, and “22-40” displayed the value for “41-56” and vice-versa. This error has been corrected (please see the revised version of Table 2 below). We apologise for any inconvenience.

Table 2 Patient and provider adjusted rate ratios (RR) from the multivariable regression model