Figures
There are errors in Tables 1–7. In Table 1, an increase in the sample size has been documented. The overall sample increased from 3,595 to 7,050. The rural women sample increased from 1,082 to 1,837. The urban sample increased from 2,513 to 5,213. All the other substantive interpretations remained the same despite some increase in means or percentages. In Tables 2 and 3, despite the changes in the percentages, rate ratios, and concentration indexes of antenatal, skilled delivery, before (discharging) postnatal care, and after (discharging) postnatal care, the substantial interpretation of the concentration index, rate ratios, and absolute differences, remain the same. In Table 4, despite some minor deviation in the odds ratios, they are still statistically not significant. The odds ratios of rural women with no education likelihood of utilizing antenatal care changed from (or = 0.88 [CI = 0.43,1.83] p>.05) to (or = 1.22 [CI = 0.71,2.10] p>.05). The odds of the rural women with primary school education changed from (or = 0.98 [CI = 0.60,1.59] p>.05) to (or = 1.08 [CI = 0.76,1.52] p>.05). In Table 5, while the odds ratios remained statistically not significant, some minor deviation in odds ratios were observed. The odds changed from (or = 1.01 [CI = 0.49,2.10] p>.05) to (or = 0.81 [CI = 0.48,1.38] p>.05). In Table 6, the odds of utilizing the before (discharging) postnatal care among rural women with primary education are still low, but the level of significance changed from being weakly significant (or = 0.06[CI = 0.38,0.95]p = 0.030) to being not statistically significant (or = 0.82[CI = 0.59,1.12]p>.05). The odds ratios of utilizing the before (discharging) postnatal care among rural poor women changed from (or = 0.81 [CI = 0.51,1.2] p>.05) to (or = 1.06 [CI = 0.73,1.53] p>.05), however the results in both cases are not statistically significant. In Table 7, there were no substantial changes in the table, despite some minor deviation in the odds ratios. Please see the correct Tables 1–7 here.
Reference
- 1. Langa N, Bhatta T (2020) The rural-urban divide in Tanzania: Residential context and socioeconomic inequalities in maternal health care utilization. PLoS ONE 15(11): e0241746. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241746 pmid:33166310
Citation: Langa N, Bhatta T (2023) Correction: The rural-urban divide in Tanzania: Residential context and socioeconomic inequalities in maternal health care utilization. PLoS ONE 18(7): e0288419. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288419
Published: July 6, 2023
Copyright: © 2023 Langa, Bhatta. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.