Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Correction: Recalculating the Net Use Gap: A Multi-Country Comparison of ITN Use versus ITN Access

  • Hannah Koenker,
  • Albert Kilian

Correction: Recalculating the Net Use Gap: A Multi-Country Comparison of ITN Use versus ITN Access

  • Hannah Koenker, 
  • Albert Kilian
PLOS
x

The values for household ownership of any ITN for Gabon and Cameroon were incorrect in data set which resulted in several errors in the published article.

In Table 1, the values in the first column for Gabon, Cameroon, and the mean for all countries are incorrect. Please see the corrected Table 1 here.

There are also errors in the graphs for Fig 1, Fig 2, and the caption for Fig 2. Please see the complete, correct graphs and captions for Fig 1 and Fig 2 here.

thumbnail
Fig 1. Ownership, access and use of ITNs for all datasets.

Survey results are ordered by ownership. Previously, the visual gap between ownership (blue line) and use (green line) made it seem as though the use gap was vast. When use is compared to access (red line), however, a much closer relationship–and narrower gap–is immediately apparent.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0161417.g001

thumbnail
Fig 2. Population with access to an ITN within the household compared to ownership of at least one ITN.

Blue dots represent the data points for data sets, the blue line the regression function (fitted values). Shaded area is the 95% confidence interval of the fitted values of population with access to an ITN within the household. Red dashed line represents the equity line where ownership is equal to access. On average, population access was 31% lower than household ownership.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0161417.g002

There is an error in the ninth sentence of the Results. The correct sentence is: Regression analysis showed that there was a close, linear relationship between access and ownership (Fig 2, p<0.0001, R-squared 0.98) with a regression coefficient of 0.69.

There is also an error in the eleventh sentence of the Results. The correct sentence is: Even at population access levels below 50%, a median 80.6% used an ITN given they had access, and this rate increased to 91.2% for access rates >50%. Linear regression of ITN use against access showed an estimated use of 89.0% (95% CI 84.1–94.0) given access (Figure 3) and comparison with a polynomial model confirmed that a linear function was the best fit to the data.

Reference

  1. 1. Koenker H, Kilian A (2014) Recalculating the Net Use Gap: A Multi-Country Comparison of ITN Use versus ITN Access. PLoS ONE 9(5): e97496. pmid:24848768