Correction: Radiomics-based prediction of FIGO grade for placenta accreta spectrum

Correction: European Radiology Experimental 7, 54 (2023)

https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-023-00369-2

The original article [1] contains numerical errors in Table 1.

Table 1.

Participant demographics and clinical outcome

	FIGO grade 1–2 (n = 18)	FIGO grade 3 (n = 23)
Age (years)	36.0 (34.0–39.75)	39.0 (37.2–42.7)
Body mass index (kg/m2)	25.2 (23.4–29.3)	25.7 (23.0–30.1)
Parity	2 (1–3)	2 (1–2.5)
No of previous Caesarean section	1 (1–2)	2 (1–3)
Gestation at MRI (weeks + days)	29 + 0 (27 + 2 − 32 + 3)	28 + 1 (27 + 0–31 + 0)
Placental location on MRI, n (%)
Placenta previa	18 (100.0)	22 (95.6)
Anterior placenta previa	16 (88.0)	22 (95.6)
Posterior placenta previa	2 (12.0)	0 (0.0)
Elective delivery, n (%)	13 (72.0)	17 (73.0)
Estimated blood loss (mL)	1,100 (735–3,250)	1,600 (1,100–5,800)
Red cell concentrate transfusion, n (%)	6 (33.3)	10 (43.5)
Surgical outcome
Caesarean hysterectomy, n (%)	7 (38.9)	22 (95.7)
Uterine conservationa (%)	11 (61.6)	1 (4.3)
FIGO histological grade, n (%)
1	4 (22.2)	0 (0.0)
2	14 (77.8)	0 (0.0)
3	0 (0.0)	23 (100)

Data are given in median (interquartile interval) unless otherwise stated

^aUterine conservation for the PAS group were cases who underwent myometrial resection

FIGO International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics

In the row "Elective delivery, n (%)", the respective cells state '30 (75)' and '7 (100)'.

They should instead respectively state '13 (72.0)' and '17 (73.0)' as shown in Table 1 of this Correction article.