The authors regret that the following information was published incorrectly. The errors that need to be corrected are as follows: 1 The primary outcome of improvements of participants over two months (8 weeks) was 61.7% not 41.7%.2 Fig. 1: Consort diagram was not published.3 Fig. 2: Changes in urinary urgency from baseline to week8 (p = 0.002) was not published4 Fig. 3: Changes in soiled underwear from baseline to week 8 was not published.5 The name of the product is Urox® Junior not Urox® Bedtime Buddy.The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused
This is a correction of Biochemia Medica 2018;28(1):010703. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11613/ BM.2018.0...
Following publication of the original article [1], we have been notified that one of the author name...
The original version of this article unfortunatelȳ contained a mistake. The X-axis labels (‘Favours ...
The authors regret an error in the text of the manuscript. In the Results section, in reference to a...
The authors regret that in the acknowledgments section, the sentence “We are very grateful to the pa...
textabstractThe reference numbers were incorrectly cited in column 3 of Table 3 by de Leeuw et al in...
The authors have been informed of an error that occurred on page 461 in which the family name of the...
The authors of the aforementioned article published in this journal (vol 183 Iss 2 pages: 161–167) a...
The authors regret that errors were present in the above article. On page 1174, in the second paragr...
Following publication of the original article [1], the authors notified us of a few requested editio...
The authors regret that errors were present in the above article. On page 1174, in the second paragr...
In the original article, the name of author Sia Daneshmand was incorrectly abbreviated as D. Daneshm...
The authors have been informed of an error that occurred on page 684 in which the number of particip...
When this paper was first published, there were errors in Figure 1 and Table 3. These errors have no...
Morning and evening efficacy evaluation of rupatadine (10 and 20 mg), compared with cetirizine 10 mg...
This is a correction of Biochemia Medica 2018;28(1):010703. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11613/ BM.2018.0...
Following publication of the original article [1], we have been notified that one of the author name...
The original version of this article unfortunatelȳ contained a mistake. The X-axis labels (‘Favours ...
The authors regret an error in the text of the manuscript. In the Results section, in reference to a...
The authors regret that in the acknowledgments section, the sentence “We are very grateful to the pa...
textabstractThe reference numbers were incorrectly cited in column 3 of Table 3 by de Leeuw et al in...
The authors have been informed of an error that occurred on page 461 in which the family name of the...
The authors of the aforementioned article published in this journal (vol 183 Iss 2 pages: 161–167) a...
The authors regret that errors were present in the above article. On page 1174, in the second paragr...
Following publication of the original article [1], the authors notified us of a few requested editio...
The authors regret that errors were present in the above article. On page 1174, in the second paragr...
In the original article, the name of author Sia Daneshmand was incorrectly abbreviated as D. Daneshm...
The authors have been informed of an error that occurred on page 684 in which the number of particip...
When this paper was first published, there were errors in Figure 1 and Table 3. These errors have no...
Morning and evening efficacy evaluation of rupatadine (10 and 20 mg), compared with cetirizine 10 mg...
This is a correction of Biochemia Medica 2018;28(1):010703. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11613/ BM.2018.0...
Following publication of the original article [1], we have been notified that one of the author name...
The original version of this article unfortunatelȳ contained a mistake. The X-axis labels (‘Favours ...