Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Correction
  • Open Access

Correction to: Evaluation of the mortality registry in Ecuador (2001–2013) – social and geographical inequalities in completeness and quality

Population Health Metrics201917:5

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-019-0185-9

  • Received: 29 March 2019
  • Accepted: 29 March 2019
  • Published:

The original article was published in Population Health Metrics 2019 17:3

Correction to: Popul Health Metrics (2019) 17:3

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-019-0183-y

Following the publication of this article [1], the authors reported a typesetting error in Table 1 that caused the columns of the table to be ordered incorrectly, and a typographical error in a sentence in the Conclusions section.

The incorrect Table 1 was published as:
Table 1

Provincial and national completeness estimates (2001 – 2010)

Area

Women

Men

Population 2001

Population 2010

Deaths IC Period

Age Range Used

Population 2001

Population 2010

Deaths IC Period

GGBa

Age Range Used

SEGb

GGB - SEGc

Mean

GGB a

SEG b

GGB - SEG c

Mean

Azuay

319,974

375,027

12,730

98.82

80.50

66.91

80.03

15–50

279,339

335,739

14,465

107.10

91.49

72.69

88.17

15–50

Bolivar

86,727

93,767

4280

98.81

71.91

71.29

78.83

20–60

83,969

89,975

5100

95.56

79.52

74.28

82.18

25–60

Cañar

111,707

119,621

4187

99.87

57.49

61.89

68.86

20–55

94,639

104,812

5137

95.54

79.06

70.87

80.59

15–50

Carchi

76,891

83,257

3147

80.20

56.76

55.98

62.56

15–50

75,106

80,905

3800

85.18

60.80

62.58

67.92

15–50

Cotopaxi

180,050

209,723

8369

99.92

83.67

72.23

83.79

20–55

169,507

197,990

10,264

101.66

84.40

65.66

81.27

15–50

Chimborazo

213,297

239,339

10,896

96.01

78.20

74.17

81.78

20–55

191,150

219,221

12,414

95.61

93.55

78.81

88.66

20–55

El Oro

258,108

295,256

8020

76.86

55.03

50.83

58.99

15–50

265,561

302,735

12,037

68.33

62.60

55.16

61.55

15–50

Esmeraldas

188,213

262,143

5758

43.07

86.01

63.62

59.33

15–50

197,331

270,912

9675

43.94

106.46

72.29

65.24

15–50

Guayas / Santa Elena

1,654,813

1,975,927

57,031

57.04

57.70

46.62

53.27

15–50

1,643,493

1,968,672

79,288

54.37

67.21

51.12

56.79

15–50

Imbabura

176,064

204,094

8243

101.18

86.67

73.53

85.66

15–55

167,689

193,105

9597

100.32

86.91

74.17

85.82

20–60

Loja

207,913

228,704

8141

100.81

62.41

59.31

70.09

15–50

198,316

221,638

9962

101.55

79.32

71.79

82.45

15–50

Los Rios

315,609

379,883

12,055

75.27

68.77

52.78

64.14

15–50

335,909

398,252

19,140

70.13

77.06

57.89

67.40

15–50

Manabi

592,524

681,575

20,872

82.71

63.62

55.61

65.51

15–50

599,521

689,525

29,639

85.19

74.86

61.20

72.40

15–50

Morona Santiago

57,891

73,126

1327

46.48

39.80

33.43

39.19

15–50

56,904

74,529

1806

54.03

63.17

49.05

54.82

15–50

Napo

38,776

50,641

1029

62.22

67.23

53.19

60.31

15–50

39,965

52,220

1577

71.98

88.74

64.05

73.57

15–50

Pastaza

29,686

41,394

718

40.59

73.71

56.18

53.57

15–50

31,808

42,084

1053

45.81

61.87

48.02

51.01

15–50

Pichincha / Santo Domingo

1,218,916

1,504,023

42,824

72.07

81.98

65.03

72.37

20–55

1,167,281

1,441,529

52,093

64.46

81.18

63.62

68.89

15–50

Tungurahua

227,308

258,907

10,747

98.69

83.24

82.22

87.44

15–55

213,470

244,014

12,569

99.48

87.86

78.87

87.94

15–55

Zamora Chinchipe

37,017

43,780

976

53.53

45.88

39.20

45.46

15–50

39,462

46,627

1391

47.16

52.06

41.78

46.62

15–50

Galapagos

8137

11,392

123

12.58

35.10

30.43

21.30

15–50

9618

12,238

187

25.46

45.66

38.83

34.51

15–50

Sucumbíos

58,774

83,431

1279

22.00

49.52

41.57

33.45

15–50

67,901

91,050

2589

28.53

58.70

46.24

40.70

15–50

Orellana

39,478

64,034

1073

28.85

105.65

74.30

52.10

15–50

45,147

70,655

1766

36.30

126.62

79.87

62.54

15–50

Ecuador

6,132,183

7,293,907

224,300

71.97

67.67

57.21

65.00

15–50

6,010,246

7,165,170

296,474

71.76

74.68

60.09

68.23

15–50

a Generalized growth balance method

b Synthetic extinct generations method

c Hybrid generalized growth balance and synthetic extinct generations method

The correct Table 1 should be:
Table 1

Provincial and national completeness estimates (2001 – 2010)

Area

Women

Men

Population 2001

Population 2010

Deaths IC Period

Completeness (%)

Age Range Used

Population 2001

Population 2010

Deaths IC Period

Completeness (%)

Age Range Used

GGBa

SEGb

GGB - SEGc

Mean

GGBa

SEGb

GGB - SEGc

Mean

Azuay

319,974

375,027

12,730

98.82

80.50

66.91

80.03

15 - 50

279,339

335,739

14,465

107.10

91.49

72.69

88.17

15 - 50

Bolivar

86,727

93,767

4,280

98.81

71.91

71.29

78.83

20 - 60

83,969

89,975

5,100

95.56

79.52

74.28

82.18

25 - 60

Cañar

111,707

119,621

4,187

99.87

57.49

61.89

68.86

20 - 55

94,639

104,812

5,137

95.54

79.06

70.87

80.59

15 - 50

Carchi

76,891

83,257

3,147

80.20

56.76

55.98

62.56

15 - 50

75,106

80,905

3,800

85.18

60.80

62.58

67.92

15 - 50

Cotopaxi

180,050

209,723

8,369

99.92

83.67

72.23

83.79

20 - 55

169,507

197,990

10,264

101.66

84.40

65.66

81.27

15 - 50

Chimborazo

213,297

239,339

10,896

96.01

78.20

74.17

81.78

20 - 55

191,150

219,221

12,414

95.61

93.55

78.81

88.66

20 - 55

El Oro

258,108

295,256

8,020

76.86

55.03

50.83

58.99

15 - 50

265,561

302,735

12,037

68.33

62.60

55.16

61.55

15 - 50

Esmeraldas

188,213

262,143

5,758

43.07

86.01

63.62

59.33

15 - 50

197,331

270,912

9,675

43.94

106.46

72.29

65.24

15 - 50

Guayas / Santa Elena

1,654,813

1,975,927

57,031

57.04

57.70

46.62

53.27

15 - 50

1,643,493

1,968,672

79,288

54.37

67.21

51.12

56.79

15 - 50

Imbabura

176,064

204,094

8,243

101.18

86.67

73.53

85.66

15 - 55

167,689

193,105

9,597

100.32

86.91

74.17

85.82

20 - 60

Loja

207,913

228,704

8,141

100.81

62.41

59.31

70.09

15 - 50

198,316

221,638

9,962

101.55

79.32

71.79

82.45

15 - 50

Los Rios

315,609

379,883

12,055

75.27

68.77

52.78

64.14

15 - 50

335,909

398,252

19,140

70.13

77.06

57.89

67.40

15 - 50

Manabi

592,524

681,575

20,872

82.71

63.62

55.61

65.51

15 - 50

599,521

689,525

29,639

85.19

74.86

61.20

72.40

15 - 50

Morona Santiago

57,891

73,126

1,327

46.48

39.80

33.43

39.19

15 - 50

56,904

74,529

1,806

54.03

63.17

49.05

54.82

15 - 50

Napo

38,776

50,641

1,029

62.22

67.23

53.19

60.31

15 - 50

39,965

52,220

1,577

71.98

88.74

64.05

73.57

15 - 50

Pastaza

29,686

41,394

718

40.59

73.71

56.18

53.57

15 - 50

31,808

42,084

1,053

45.81

61.87

48.02

51.01

15 - 50

Pichincha / Santo Domingo

1,218,916

1,504,023

42,824

72.07

81.98

65.03

72.37

20 - 55

1,167,281

1,441,529

52,093

64.46

81.18

63.62

68.89

15 - 50

Tungurahua

227,308

258,907

10,747

98.69

83.24

82.22

87.44

15 - 55

213,470

244,014

12,569

99.48

87.86

78.87

87.94

15 - 55

Zamora Chinchipe

37,017

43,780

976

53.53

45.88

39.20

45.46

15 - 50

39,462

46,627

1,391

47.16

52.06

41.78

46.62

15 - 50

Galapagos

8,137

11,392

123

12.58

35.10

30.43

21.30

15 - 50

9,618

12,238

187

25.46

45.66

38.83

34.51

15 - 50

Sucumbíos

58,774

83,431

1,279

22.00

49.52

41.57

33.45

15 - 50

67,901

91,050

2,589

28.53

58.70

46.24

40.70

15 - 50

Orellana

39,478

64,034

1,073

28.85

105.65

74.30

52.10

15 - 50

45,147

70,655

1,766

36.30

126.62

79.87

62.54

15 - 50

Ecuador

6,132,183

7,293,907

224,300

71.97

67.67

57.21

65.00

15 - 50

6,010,246

7,165,170

296,474

71.76

74.68

60.09

68.23

15 - 50

aGeneralized growth balance method

bSynthetic extinct generations method

cHybrid generalized growth balance and synthetic extinct generations method

In the Conclusion section the incorrect sentence was:

“Galapagos has a low percentage of garbage codes (high quality) and also a low and also a low completeness estimate.”

It should say:

“Galapagos has a low percentage of garbage codes (high quality) and also a low completeness estimate.”

The original article has been corrected. The publisher apologizes to the readers and the authors for any inconvenience caused by these errors.

Notes

Declarations

Open AccessThis 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.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Agència de Salut Pública de Barcelona, Plaça Lesseps 1, 08023 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
(2)
Health Inequalities Research Group, Employment Conditions Knowledge Network (GREDS-EMCONET), Department of Political and Social Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Ramon Trias Fargas, 25-27, 08005 Barcelona, Spain
(3)
Johns Hopkins University, Pompeu Fabra University Public Policy Center, Barcelona, Spain
(4)
Transdisciplinary Research Group on Socioecological Transitions (GinTRANS2), Universidad Autónoma Madrid, 28049 Madrid, Spain
(5)
CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain
(6)
Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain
(7)
Department of Experimental and Health Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
(8)
Department of Demography and Cedeplar, Faculdade de Ciências Econômicas, FACE/UFMG, Campus Pampulha, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627, Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, CEP 31270-901, Brazil

Reference

  1. Peralta A, et al. Evaluation of the mortality registry in Ecuador (2001–2013) – social and geographical inequalities in completeness and quality. Popul Health Metrics. 2019;17:3 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-019-0183-y.View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s). 2019

Advertisement