There are several errors in the article Giné-Garriga M, Roqué-Fíguls M, Coll-Planas L, Sitjà-Rabert M, Salvà A. Physical exercise interventions for improving performance-based measures of physical function in community-dwelling frail older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis, published in Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2014; 95: 753-69 (
        There are inconsistencies between the figure and the abstract regarding gait speed. The correct statement appeared in the figure. The abstract should have stated that “When compared with control interventions, exercise was shown to improve normal gait speed (mean difference [MD]=.06m/s; 95% confidence interval [CI], .04–.09), fast gait speed (MD=.08m/s; 95% CI, .02–.14), and the Short Physical Performance Battery (MD=2.18; 95% CI, 1.56–2.80).”
        Labeling of Figure 2 was not correct in the published version. The figure illustrates a positive outcome (higher values indicate higher benefit); the results favour the exercise group as mentioned in the results section. Labels should be ‘favours control’ (left), ‘favours exercise’ (right).
        Finally, labels are missing in Figure 3. The labels should be ‘favours control’ (left), ‘favours exercise’ (right).
        We apologize for the confusion resulting from these errors.
        Figure thumbnail gr1
        Fig 2Gait results for exercise compared with controls. Abbreviations: df, degrees of freedom; IV, Inverse Variance method.
        Figure thumbnail gr2
        Fig 3Combined performance results of exercise compared with control. Note that De Jong results have been rescaled from 0 to 16 (16 worse result) to 0 to 100. Abbreviations: df, degrees of freedom; IV, Inverse Variance method.

        Linked Article