In this paper by Wennerholm and colleagues (BMJ 2019;367: l6131, doi:10.1136/bmj.l6131, published 20 November), the data in table 3 for admittance to neonatal intensive care unit should have been for ≥4 days [not <4 days] and presented in the row: 21/55 (38.2%) [not 34/55 (61.8%)] for the induction group and 36/81 (44.4%) [not 45/81 (55.6%)] for the expectant management group, with a relative risk of 0.86 (95% confidence interval 0.57 to 1.30) and P=0.58 [not 1.11 (95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.48) and P=0.58]. The same mistake appeared in supplementary table E, in the per protocol analysis. The supplementary file has been revised.
. 2021 Dec 15;375:n3072. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n3072
Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks (SWEdish Post-term Induction Study, SWEPIS): multicentre, open label, randomised, superiority trial
Collection date 2021.
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
PMCID: PMC8684047 PMID: 34911689
This corrects the article "Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks (SWEdish Post-term Induction Study, SWEPIS): multicentre, open label, randomised, superiority trial" in volume 367, l6131.