This Article  • PDF of this Correction  • Original article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal

Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:2333.

In the Original Investigation by Jacobson et al, titled "Impact of Evidence-Based `Clinical Judgment' on the Number of American Adults Requiring Lipid-Lowering Therapy Based on Updated NHANES III Data," published in the May 8 issue of the Archives (2000;160:1361-1369), parts A and C were reversed in Figure 1 on page 1365. Figure 1 is reprinted correctly here. The journal regrets the error.

View larger version (41K): [in this window] [in a new window] Figure 1. Distribution of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels: A, in individuals without coronary heart disease (CHD) who had less than 2 risk factors; B, in individuals without CHD who had 2 or more risk factors; and C, in individuals with CHD. The LDL-C level was normal to mildly elevated in most individuals in each risk category. Individuals with "borderline" LDL-C levels would be considered for drug therapy using a broader application of clinical judgment as recommended in the Adult Treatment Panel II (ATP II) guidelines. Bar height indicates the number of individuals in each LDL-C range. To convert LDL-C levels from milligrams per deciliter to millimoles per liter, multiply milligrams per deciliter by 0.02586.