摘要：Correction to:
Scientific Reports
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-62435-8, published online 03 April 2020
The original version of this Article contained errors. Figure
1a duplicated Figure
1c. The figure legend was also revised for accuracy and “squares” now reads “dots”.
The original Figure
1 and accompanying legend appear below.
Figure 1
Both wavelet and correlation indices increased while mean arterial blood pressure (ABP) decreased below the lower limit of autoregulation (LLA). (
A–
C) In paired comparisons among 68 piglets, the wavelet autoregulation indices (wPRx, wCOx, wHVx) and correlation indices (PRx, COx and HVx) correlated with each other. Each piglet provided one index value averaged from ABP above the LLA and one index from ABP below the LLA, thereby generating 136 data points per graph. The black squares are index values when ABP exceeded the LLA. The red dots are index values when ABP was below the LLA. (
D–
F) Graphical depiction of the indices across changes in blood pressure. Each piglet’s ABP LLA is centered at zero on the x-axis (dashed line) to show the wavelet method (blue lines) and correlation method (red lines) responses to changes in blood pressure. Data are shown as mean ± standard error of the mean.
The data from the corrected Figure
1 was re-analysed; the Results section, under the subheading ‘Distinguishing ABP above from ABP below the LLA’, was revised as follows to reflect this:
“Wavelet indices and their respective correlation indices were highly correlated (r = 0.78, p < 0.001 for PRx and wPRx; r = 0.66, p < 0.001 for COx and wCOx; and r = 0.78, p = 0.002 for HVx and wHVx; and; Figure
1A–C).”
now reads:
“Wavelet indices and their respective correlation indices were highly correlated (r = 0.78, p < 0.001 for PRx and wPRx; r = 0.66, p < 0.001 for COx and wCOx; and r = 0.69, p < 0.001 for HVx and wHVx; Figures
1A–1C).”
The original Article has been corrected. This correction does not affect the conclusions of the Article.
