Corrigendum: Gender Differences in Dysfunctional Attitudes in Major Depressive Disorder

In the original article, there was a mistake in Table 2 as published. A P-value was missing in Table 2 , on the row “Compulsion”. The corrected Table 2 appears below. Meanwhile, the full name showed as “14-item Hamilton rating scale for depression” of the HAMA₁₄ was wrong in the title of Table 4. The corrected title of Table 4 is as following: Multiple linear regression analyses for assessing effects of age, gender, education, BMI, smoking history, 24-item Hamilton rating scale for depression (HAMD₂₄), and 14-item Hamilton anxiety rating scale (HAMA₁₄) predicting dysfunctional attitudes in major depressive disorder (MDD) patients.

Table 2.

Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) of Chinese version of the dysfunctional attitude scale – form A (C-DAS-A) total and factor scores of major depressive disorder (MDD) and healthy control (HC) groups.

Item	MDD		HC		P
	Male (n = 75)	Female (n = 97)	Male (n = 74)	Female (n = 85)
Total score	150.17 ± 25.98	160.05 ± 28.98	126.92 ± 29.94	123.73 ± 22.30	<.001
Factor scores
Vulnerability	17.25 ± 4.42	18.72 ± 4.67	14.68 ± 4.95	14.81 ± 4.13	<.001
Attraction and repulsion	18.12 ± 5.04	18.53 ± 6.25	12.77 ± 5.26	12.93 ± 4.76	<.001
Perfectionism	18.21 ± 5.29	19.19 ± 5.94	15.15 ± 5.96	14.64 ± 4.06	<.001
Compulsion	18.28 ± 4.50	19.55 ± 4.62	16.15 ± 4.30	16.34 ± 3.71	<.001
Seeking applause	18.45 ± 5.16	20.40 ± 5.47	16.74 ± 8.41	15.59 ± 4.91	<.001
Dependence	18.67 ± 4.00	20.36 ± 5.23	15.78 ± 5.09	14.86 ± 4.15	<.001
Self-determination attitude	21.07 ± 5.95	23.03 ± 5.28	18.49 ± 5.53	17.24 ± 4.62	<.001
Cognition philosophy	20.12 ± 5.08	20.28 ± 5.62	17.16 ± 5.37	17.33 ± 4.73	<.001

Data are presented as mean ± SD; Bold values indicate statistical significance; P showed the difference in the C-DAS-A total and factor scores between MDD and HC groups; ANCOVA, analysis of covariance; C-DAS-A, Chinese version of the dysfunctional attitude scale – form A; MDD, major depressive disorder; HC, healthy control.

We apologize for these errors and these do not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.