Abstract
Senore C, Hassan C, Regge D, et al. J Med Screen 2018. DOI: 10.1177/0969141318789710
The authors wish to correct two errors in this online version of this paper: (i) In the Methods section on the third page of the article, right hand column, third paragraph, second sentence, 26% should be 41%. (ii) In table 2, a footnote should be added beside the asterisk: We assumed a lower value for CRC mortality reduction in the reference scenario for the model, to take into account the higher risk of death observed among people unwilling to undergo screening, compared with those who were interested in participating (see text and reference 21).
These changes occur because, when describing the results of Ventura et al [9], we reported the figure for the mortality reduction used in the reference scenario for our model (26%), and not the value observed in the study (41%). A lower value for CRC mortality reduction in the reference scenario for the model was assumed, to take into account the higher risk of death observed among people unwilling to undergo screening, who represent a self-selected group of subjects showing a higher CRC mortality than subjects who were interested in participating, who showed a lower risk of CRC death, in the absence of screening. The CRC mortality value used in the reference scenario for the model (26%) is reported in table 2, summarizing the model assumptions. A 40% estimate for mortality reduction was used in the sensitivity analysis and the main conclusions of our analysis are unchanged.