In box 5 of this article by Yu-Qing Zhang et al (BMJ 2022; 376:e067476; doi:10.1136/bmj-2021-067476) the study’s method of analysis was incorrectly described as repeated-measure analysis of variance. The online version has been corrected to say that the study used the Expectation for Relief Scale to measure patients’ expectations at baseline and analysed the effect of expectations as a continuous variable using ANCOVA. In addition, a sentence in the section “Consideration 4: who should perform the intervention?” that referred to the effect of practitioner training and experience on pain has been removed because of changes to the supporting reference.
. 2022 Apr 25;377:o1046. doi: 10.1136/bmj.o1046
How to design high quality acupuncture trials—a consensus informed by evidence
Collection date 2022.
© 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: PMC9036613 PMID: 35470144
This corrects the article "How to design high quality acupuncture trials—a consensus informed by evidence" in volume 376, e067476.