- Erratum
- Open access
- Published:
Erratum to: A Monte Carlo simulation study comparing linear regression, beta regression, variable-dispersion beta regression and fractional logit regression at recovering average difference measures in a two sample design
BMC Medical Research Methodology volume 16, Article number: 152 (2016)
Erratum
After publication of the original article [1], the authors noticed an error in Fig. 1. The legend included in the original sub-plot of Fig. 1 was labelled “phi = 500 (p = 25, q = 475)”; however, the figure title suggested phi = 1000.
An updated version of Fig. 1 is published in this erratum, where the legend has been updated to “phi = 1000 (p = 50, q = 950)” to be consistent with the figure title.
Reference
Meaney C, Moineddin R. A Monte Carlo simulation study comparing linear regression, beta regression, variable-dispersion beta regression and fractional logit regression at recovering average difference measures in a two sample design. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14:14. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-14.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The online version of the original article can be found under doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-14.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
About this article
Cite this article
Meaney, C., Moineddin, R. Erratum to: A Monte Carlo simulation study comparing linear regression, beta regression, variable-dispersion beta regression and fractional logit regression at recovering average difference measures in a two sample design. BMC Med Res Methodol 16, 152 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0256-6
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0256-6