Skip Navigation

Erratum for Kim et al., J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 60 (5) 1108-1114.


JAC Advance Access published online on April 11, 2008
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, doi:10.1093/jac/dkn171
This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
62/1/214    most recent
dkn171v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kim, E. S.
Right arrow Articles by Choe, K. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Kim, E. S.
Right arrow Articles by Choe, K. W.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Erratum

A survey of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Korea

Eu Suk Kim, Jin Su Song, Hye Jin Lee, Pyoeng Gyun Choe, Kyung Hwa Park, Jae Hyun Cho, Wan Beom Park, Sung-Han Kim, Ji-Hwan Bang, Dong-Min Kim, Kyoung Un Park, Sue Shin, Mi Suk Lee, Hee Jung Choi, Nam Joong Kim, Eui-Chong Kim, Myoung-don Oh, Hong Bin Kim and Kang Won Choe

J Antimicrob Chemother 2007; 60: 1108–14

In Table 3 of the above article, the numbers of antimicrobial-susceptible community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) isolates are stated incorrectly due to an error in calculation during revision of the original table. A corrected version of the table appears below. In addition, the third sentence of the last paragraph of the Results section, ‘The ST5 and ST239 clones of CA-MRSA isolates were also more susceptible to the antimicrobial agents than the clones of HA-MRSA isolates’ is affected by these errors and should be ‘The antibiotic resistance profiles of the ST5 and ST239 clones in the CA-MRSA group were similar to those of the HA-MRSA isolates’. The authors emphasize that the conclusions of the study are unchanged and would like to offer their sincere apologies for these errors.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 3. Antimicrobial susceptibilities of community-associated (n = 72) and hospital-associated methicillin-resistant S. aureus (n = 72) isolates based on sequence type; no. (%) of susceptible isolates

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
62/1/214    most recent
dkn171v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kim, E. S.
Right arrow Articles by Choe, K. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Kim, E. S.
Right arrow Articles by Choe, K. W.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?