Corrigendum to: Can menstrual health apps selected based on users' needs change health-related factors? A double-blind randomized controlled trial
Abstract
Jisan Lee and Jeongeun Kim. Can menstrual health apps selected based on users’ needs change health-related factors? A double-blind randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2019; ocz019, https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocz019. In the original publication of this article, the author Jisan Lee was incorrectly assigned affiliation 1 and 2. The only affiliation of the author Jisan Lee should be affiliation 1 Department of Nursing science, College of Life & Health Sciences, Hoseo University, Asan, Korea. This has been corrected in the original article. The author apologizes for this error.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.
Read the paper
Related studies
- In silico strategies for modeling RNA aptamers and predicting binding sites of their molecular targets
- Folic acid-hydrophilic polymer coated mesoporous silica nanoparticles target doxorubicin delivery
- Anti-phytopathogenic and plant growth promoting potential of endophytic fungi isolated from Dysoxylum gotadhora
- Mercury toxicity causes iron and sulfur deficiencies along with oxidative injuries in alfalfa (Medicago sativa)
- Suppression of lncRNA GAS6-AS2 alleviates sepsis-related acute kidney injury through regulating the miR-136-5p/OXSR1 axis in vitro and in vivo
- Assessing the Protective Effect of Moringa oleifera Extract against Bone Metastasis: An In Vitro Simulated Digestion Approach
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.