Correction
After publication of our article [1] it has come to our attention that Fig. 3 was accidentally omitted. In the section “Ease of reading”, the sentence “FRE scores were recorded for the original, author-revised and independently edited PES (Fig. 2).” should read “FRE scores were recorded for the original, author-revised and independently edited PES (Fig. 3).” Figure 3 and its legend appear below.
FRE score for summaries compared across three groups. Horizontal dashed line indicates an FRE of 50, which is approximately equivalent to a broadsheet newspaper [27]
Reference
Kirkpatrick E, Gaisford W, Williams E, et al. Understanding Plain English Summaries: A Comparison of two Approaches to Improve the Quality of Plain English Summaries in Research. Research Involvement and Engagement 2017. 2017;3(1):17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-017-0064-0.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The original article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-017-0064-0.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
About this article
Cite this article
Kirkpatrick, E., Gaisford, W., Williams, E. et al. Correction to: Understanding Plain English Summaries: A Comparison of two Approaches to Improve the Quality of Plain English Summaries in Research. Res Involv Engagem 3, 32 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-017-0082-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-017-0082-y