Figures
In the Incubation period and serial interval subsection of the Methods, there is an error in the second sentence. “Serial interval” should be “infectious period”. A reference is also missing in the third sentence. The corrected subsection is as follows:
Incubation period and infectious period
The incubation period has not been determined yet and we set it at 5.2 days [13] as a base case and 6.4 days [16] for sensitivity analysis. The infectious period has not been determined and we assumed 9.5 days [17] and 4.6 days for sensitivity, which is 2 times of 2.3 days–that is the difference between 7.5 days serial interval and 5.2 days incubation period [13]. Note that these parameter values were to be fitted with different assumptions for distribution [18]. However, in an average sense, they have few differences with other fitting results and can be used as parameters in our model. With these parameters, we set the base-, worst-, and best-case scenarios and performed the sensitivity analysis with them (See Table 4).
The image for Fig 4 is incorrect and appears as a duplicate of Fig 7. The image for Fig 6 is incorrect and appears as a duplicate of Fig 1. Please see the correct figures here.
(A) Epidemics in doctor status. (B), Epidemics in 10 statuses; from top to bottom, ADM, OPD, ER. Abbreviations:—ADM: admission; OPD: outpatient department; ER: emergency room.
Effectiveness denotes the proportion of decrease of the confirmed cases due to an intervention. We assume the sensitivity of front door screening of 0.5 or 0.7 and the protection rates possibly becoming 0.3, 0.6, or 0.9 as reinforcing protection device. Abbreviations:—PPE: personal protective equipment; DN: doctors and nurses; PC: patients and caregivers; ADM: admission; OPD: outpatient department; ER: emergency room.
In Table 2, the Symbol and Value of row 4 should be center-justified. Please see the correct Table 2 here.
In Table 4, the reference for 1/γ in the Worst Scenario row should be reference 13, not reference 18. Please see the correct Table 4 here.
The ORCID iDs are missing for multiple authors. Please see the authors’ respective ORCID iDs here:
- Author Yae Jee Baek’s ORCID iD is: 0000-0003-0994-4940 (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0994-4940).
- Author Yunsuk Cho’s ORCID iD is: 0000-0002-6089-876X (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6089-876X).
- Author Jong Hoon Hyun’s ORCID iD is: 0000-0002-9621-0250 (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9621-0250).
- Author Moo Hyun Kim’s ORCID iD is: 0000-0003-3634-0296 (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3634-0296).
- Author Yujin Sohn’s ORCID iD is: 0000-0001-7018-8641 (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7018-8641).
- Author Jung Ho Kim’s ORCID iD is: 0000-0002-5033-3482 (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5033-3482).
- Author Jin Young Ahn’s ORCID iD is: 0000-0002-3740-2826 (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3740-2826).
- Author Su Jin Jeong’s ORCID iD is: 0000-0003-4025-4542 (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4025-4542).
Reference
- 1. Baek YJ, Lee T, Cho Y, Hyun JH, Kim MH, Sohn Y, et al. (2020) A mathematical model of COVID-19 transmission in a tertiary hospital and assessment of the effects of different intervention strategies. PLoS ONE 15(10): e0241169. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241169 pmid:33104736
Citation: Baek YJ, Lee T, Cho Y, Hyun JH, Kim MH, Sohn Y, et al. (2021) Correction: A mathematical model of COVID-19 transmission in a tertiary hospital and assessment of the effects of different intervention strategies. PLoS ONE 16(6): e0253685. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253685
Published: June 17, 2021
Copyright: © 2021 Baek et al. 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.