Corrigendum to “Attachment style and filial obligation in the burden of caregivers of dementia patients” [Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 75 (2018) 104–111] (Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics (2018) 75 (104–111), (S0167494317303382), (10.1016/j.archger.2017.12.002))

Juwon Lee, Bo Kyung Sohn, Hyunjoo Lee, Su Jeong Seong, Soowon Park, Jun-Young Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debateResearch

Abstract

The authors regret that in our published version on page 106, under “2.1. Participants” it currently reads: “Data was collected from 98 female caregivers of patients with mild to severe dementia. Participants were caregivers of dementia patients in a general hospital and consisted of 50 daughters and 48 daughter-in-laws. We included only those who provided care for the patients at a minimum of three hours a day, and at least three days per week.” We would like to correct this to: “Out of a total 132 caregivers who expressed interest to participate, eight caregivers did not return the surveys, and 25 did not meet our criteria of providing care at a minimum of three hours a day and at least three days per week. One participant was excluded as the residuals in our analysis models exceeded three standard deviations. The final sample included 98 female caregivers of patients with mild to severe dementia. Participants were caregivers of dementia patients in a general hospital and consisted of 50 daughters and 48 daughter-in-laws.” The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.

Original languageEnglish
Number of pages1
JournalArchives of Gerontology and Geriatrics
Volume82
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 May 2019

Fingerprint

gerontology
geriatrics
dementia
Geriatrics
Caregivers
caregiver
Dementia
obligation
Nuclear Family
General Hospitals
Law
model analysis
corrigendum
Patient Care
Emotions

Cite this

@article{c9e1a1de58214b289c0f8d3a0fc558e7,
title = "Corrigendum to “Attachment style and filial obligation in the burden of caregivers of dementia patients” [Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 75 (2018) 104–111] (Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics (2018) 75 (104–111), (S0167494317303382), (10.1016/j.archger.2017.12.002))",
abstract = "The authors regret that in our published version on page 106, under “2.1. Participants” it currently reads: “Data was collected from 98 female caregivers of patients with mild to severe dementia. Participants were caregivers of dementia patients in a general hospital and consisted of 50 daughters and 48 daughter-in-laws. We included only those who provided care for the patients at a minimum of three hours a day, and at least three days per week.” We would like to correct this to: “Out of a total 132 caregivers who expressed interest to participate, eight caregivers did not return the surveys, and 25 did not meet our criteria of providing care at a minimum of three hours a day and at least three days per week. One participant was excluded as the residuals in our analysis models exceeded three standard deviations. The final sample included 98 female caregivers of patients with mild to severe dementia. Participants were caregivers of dementia patients in a general hospital and consisted of 50 daughters and 48 daughter-in-laws.” The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.",
author = "Juwon Lee and Sohn, {Bo Kyung} and Hyunjoo Lee and Seong, {Su Jeong} and Soowon Park and Jun-Young Lee",
year = "2019",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.archger.2019.02.012",
language = "English",
volume = "82",
journal = "Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics",
issn = "0167-4943",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Corrigendum to “Attachment style and filial obligation in the burden of caregivers of dementia patients” [Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 75 (2018) 104–111] (Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics (2018) 75 (104–111), (S0167494317303382), (10.1016/j.archger.2017.12.002))

AU - Lee, Juwon

AU - Sohn, Bo Kyung

AU - Lee, Hyunjoo

AU - Seong, Su Jeong

AU - Park, Soowon

AU - Lee, Jun-Young

PY - 2019/5/1

Y1 - 2019/5/1

N2 - The authors regret that in our published version on page 106, under “2.1. Participants” it currently reads: “Data was collected from 98 female caregivers of patients with mild to severe dementia. Participants were caregivers of dementia patients in a general hospital and consisted of 50 daughters and 48 daughter-in-laws. We included only those who provided care for the patients at a minimum of three hours a day, and at least three days per week.” We would like to correct this to: “Out of a total 132 caregivers who expressed interest to participate, eight caregivers did not return the surveys, and 25 did not meet our criteria of providing care at a minimum of three hours a day and at least three days per week. One participant was excluded as the residuals in our analysis models exceeded three standard deviations. The final sample included 98 female caregivers of patients with mild to severe dementia. Participants were caregivers of dementia patients in a general hospital and consisted of 50 daughters and 48 daughter-in-laws.” The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.

AB - The authors regret that in our published version on page 106, under “2.1. Participants” it currently reads: “Data was collected from 98 female caregivers of patients with mild to severe dementia. Participants were caregivers of dementia patients in a general hospital and consisted of 50 daughters and 48 daughter-in-laws. We included only those who provided care for the patients at a minimum of three hours a day, and at least three days per week.” We would like to correct this to: “Out of a total 132 caregivers who expressed interest to participate, eight caregivers did not return the surveys, and 25 did not meet our criteria of providing care at a minimum of three hours a day and at least three days per week. One participant was excluded as the residuals in our analysis models exceeded three standard deviations. The final sample included 98 female caregivers of patients with mild to severe dementia. Participants were caregivers of dementia patients in a general hospital and consisted of 50 daughters and 48 daughter-in-laws.” The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062299104&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.archger.2019.02.012

DO - 10.1016/j.archger.2019.02.012

M3 - Comment/debate

VL - 82

JO - Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics

JF - Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics

SN - 0167-4943

ER -