Corrigendum: Effects of Computer-based Stress Management Training on Psychological Well-being and Work Performance in Japanese Employees: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

In Table 2, Mean and SD were opposite between the intervention group and the wait-list control group. In Table 3, there was a mistake in the annotation: the number of the intervention group was 142. The corrected Table 2 and Table 3 are presented below.

We apologize for any inconvenience that this may have caused.

*Important errors made by the authors

Table 2

Table 2. Baseline characteristics by condition and intracluster correlation coefficients (ICC) of primary outcome.

Valuables		Intervention (n=142)		Wait-list control (n=121)		p value
		Mean	(SD)	Mean	(SD)
Primary outcome
	Psychological distress	2.0	(0.48)	2.1	(0.56)	0.16
	Work performance	5.8	(2.01)	5.5	(2.02)	0.30
	Job satisfaction	3.0	(0.66)	2.9	(0.65)	0.10
	Work engagement	3.0	(0.91)	2.7	(0.92)	0.03
Secondary outcome
	Problem-solving	3.0	(0.76)	2.8	(0.78)	0.19
	Seeking social support	2.7	(0.90)	2.5	(0.85)	0.13
	Changing mood	2.8	(0.98)	2.8	(0.99)	0.98
	Emotional expression involving others	1.5	(0.52)	1.5	(0.49)	0.86
	Avoidance and suppression	1.8	(0.67)	2.0	(0.69)	0.05
	Changing point of view	2.5	(0.74)	2.4	(0.66)	0.13
	Knowledge about stress management	2.8	(0.80)	3.0	(0.92)	0.07
	Supervisor support	2.6	(0.59)	2.5	(0.62)	0.16
	Coworker support	2.7	(0.56)	2.6	(0.58)	0.25
Covariate
	Job demands	3.0	(0.49)	3.2	(0.63)	0.08

Table 3

Table 3. Comparison of the scores between study conditions by mixed-effects models ANOVA.

			T0		T1		T2		p value	Between-ES†
			Mean	(SD)	Mean	(SD)	Mean	(SD)		T1	T2
Primary outcome
	Psychological distress
		Intervention‡	2.0	(0.48)	1.9	(0.45)	2.0	(0.45)	0.991	0.16	0.14
		Wait-list control§	2.1	(0.56	2.0	(0.55)	2.0	(0.55)
	Work performance
		Intervention	5.8	(2.01)	5.8	(1.93)	5.9	(1.75)	0.468	0.24	0.2
		Wait-list control	5.5	(2.02)	5.4	(1.82)	5.5	(1.91)
	Job satisfaction
		Intervention	3.0	(0.66)	3.1	(0.60)	3.0	(0.57)	0.356	0.35	0.29
		Wait-list control	2.9	(0.65)	2.8	(0.64)	2.8	(0.65)
	Work engagement
		Intervention	3.0	(0.91)	2.9	(0.91)	3.0	(0.99)	0.182	0.12	0.19
		Wait-list control	2.7	(0.92)	2.8	(0.94)	2.8	(0.94)
Secondary outcome
	Problem-solving
		Intervention	3.0	(0.76)	3.1	(0.75)	3.1	(0.71)	0.255	0.31	0.37
		Wait-list control	2.8	(0.78)	2.9	(0.71)	2.8	(0.82)
	Seeking social support
		Intervention	2.7	(0.90)	2.9	(0.84)	2.9	(0.80)	0.413	0.33	0.37
		Wait-list control	2.5	(0.85)	2.6	(0.81)	2.6	(0.86)
	Changing mood
		Intervention	2.8	(0.98)	2.6	(0.98)	2.7	(0.91)	0.521	0.13	0.02
		Wait-list control	2.8	(0.99)	2.7	(0.98)	2.7	(0.99)
	Emotional expression involving others
		Intervention	1.5	(0.52)	1.6	(0.59)	1.6	(0.58)	0.696	0.05	0.09
		Wait-list control	1.5	(0.49)	1.6	(0.51)	1.6	(0.58)
	Avoidance and suppression
		Intervention	1.8	(0.67)	1.8	(0.69)	1.8	(0.69)	0.104	0.18	0.46
		Wait-list control	2.0	(0.69)	2	(0.72)	2.1	(0.79)
	Changing a point of view
		Intervention	2.5	(0.74)	2.5	(0.62)	2.6	(0.72)	0.891	0.19	0.26
		Wait-list control	2.4	(0.66)	2.4	(0.65)	2.4	(0.65)
	Knowledge about stress management
		Intervention	2.8	(0.80)	3.2	(0.88)	3.0	(0.88)	0.003	0.19	0.19
		Wait-list control	3.0	(0.92)	3.0	(0.84)	2.8	(0.81)
	Supervisor support
		Intervention	2.6	(0.59)	2.7	(0.55)	2.7	(0.61)	0.546	0.23	0.26
		Wait-list control	2.5	(0.62)	2.5	(0.60)	2.5	(0.61)
	Coworker support
		Intervention	2.7	(0.56)	2.7	(0.52)	2.7	(0.58)	0.562	0.17	0.29
		Wait-list control	2.6	(0.58)	2.6	(0.54)	2.6	(0.54)

Means and standard deviation (SD) are reported for each primary and secondary outcome at baseline (T0), 9 (T1) and 19 (T2) weeks of follow-up. p-values are based on mixed-model repeated measures ANOVA. Job demands were adjusted for in the model. †Cohen’s d: Small effect 0.20–0.49, medium effect 0.50–0.79, large effect >0.8010) . ‡Intervention group (n=142) §Wait-list control group (n=121).