Corrigendum to “self-reported cannabis use is inconsistent with the results from drug-screening in youth at ultra high-risk for psychosis in Colorado” [Schizophr. Res. 157 (0) (August 2014) 317–318] (S0920996414002849) (10.1016/j.schres.2014.05.032))

Emily E. Carol*, Vijay A. Mittal

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debatepeer-review

Abstract

The authors regret that the results from a total of five urine panels were coded incorrectly. Results from the corrected dataset are presented in bold: 1) the urine panel identified 13 (40.6%) participants as being positive for THC (instead of 12, 36.4%); 2) there were 10 cases where the results of the urine panel were inconsistent with self-report (instead of 13); 3) 2 (6.3%) participants did not report drug use but the urine screen detected THC (instead of 3, 9.4%); 4) 8 (25%) participants reported cannabis usage in the past month but the urine screen was negative (instead of 10, 31.3%); 5) 2 (6.2%) participants reported heavy cannabis usage in the past month but the urine screen was negative (instead of 4,12.5%). The primary points made in the letter do not change; however, support from the descriptive data is slightly diminished. The authors would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused by this mistake. Contributors: Dr. Mittal and Emily Carol conducted analyses, and drafted the manuscript. Dr. Mittal supervised the administration and attained the funding for this study. Conflict of interest: There are no conflicts of interest to report.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Number of pages1
JournalSchizophrenia Research
Volume192
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2018

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Biological Psychiatry

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Corrigendum to “self-reported cannabis use is inconsistent with the results from drug-screening in youth at ultra high-risk for psychosis in Colorado” [Schizophr. Res. 157 (0) (August 2014) 317–318] (S0920996414002849) (10.1016/j.schres.2014.05.032))'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this