Thus, the in-line variable "is solved for [C.sub.MET,med](t) and substituted into Equation 2. ..."
EHP apologizes for the error.
In Table 6 of the article by Mendiola et al. [Environ Health Perspect 118:1286-1291 (2010)], the upper confidence limit for total motile sperm given as 0.70 should have been 0.07. Thus the correct [beta] (95% confidence interval) values for total motile count are -0.05 (-0.17 to 0.07).
The authors apologize for the error.
Competing financial interest declarations were not included in editorials published in the December issue of Environmental Health Perspectives, the statements are provided below.
L.S. Birnbuam and A. Bergman, authors of the editorial "Brominated and Chlorinated Flame Retardants: The San Antonio Statement" [Environ Health Perspect 118:A514-A515 (2010)], declare they have no actual or potential competing financial interests.
J. DiGangi, A. Blum, A. Bergman, C. deWit, D. Lucas, D. Mortimer, A. Schecter, M. Scheringer, S Shaw, and T Webster, authors of the "San Antonio Statement on Brominated and Chlorinated Flame Retardants" [Environ Health Perspect 118:A516 (2010)], declare they have no actual or potential competing financial interests.
Beginning in January 2011, EHP will publish a declaration of competing financial interests for authors of all editorials.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Publication:||Environmental Health Perspectives|
|Article Type:||Correction notice|
|Date:||Jan 1, 2011|
|Previous Article:||Transboundary Risk Governance.|
|Next Article:||Integrated urban-rural frameworks for air pollution and health-related research in India: the way forward.|