Correction: Comparison of general and cardiac care-specific indices of spatial access in Australia

Vincent Lawrence Versace; Neil T. Coffee; Julie Franzon; Dorothy Turner; Jarrod Lange; Danielle Taylor; Robyn Clark

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0221465

Correction: Comparison of general and cardiac care-specific indices of spatial access in Australia

Vincent Lawrence Versace, Neil T. Coffee, Julie Franzon, Dorothy Turner, Jarrod Lange, Danielle Taylor, Robyn Clark

College of Nursing and Health Sciences

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

There are errors in the captions for Tables 2 and 3, Figs 2 and 3. Please see the complete, correct Tables 2 and 3, Figs 2 and 3 captions here.

Download: PPT PowerPoint slide PNG larger image TIFF original image Table 2. Australian localities by Cardiac ARIA (acute) and ARIA+ Categories.

Red shading indicates good acute cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Blue shading indicates poor acute cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Localities displayed in Fig 1 and Fig 2.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465.t001

Table 3. Australian localities by Cardiac ARIA (aftercare) and ARIA+ Categories.

Red shading indicates good aftercare cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Blue shading indicates poor aftercare cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Localities displayed in Fig 3 and Fig 4.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465.t002

Fig 2. The geographical locations of the shaded cells from Table 2 highlighting the main discrepancies between Cardiac ARIA (after) and the ARIA+ remoteness structure [24] (low acute cardiac services relative to ARIA+) (n = 75).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465.g001

Fig 3. The geographical locations of the shaded cells from Table 3 highlighting the main discrepancies between Cardiac ARIA (acute) and the ARIA+ remoteness structure [24] (high aftercare cardiac services relative to ARIA+) (n = 876).
Reference1. Versace VL, Coffee NT, Franzon J, Turner D, Lange J, Taylor D, et al. (2019) Comparison of general and cardiac care-specific indices of spatial access in Australia. PLoS ONE 14(7): e0219959. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219959 pmid:31344082

Original language	English
Article number	e0221465
Number of pages	4
Journal	PLoS One
Volume	14
Issue number	7
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465
Publication status	Published - 1 Aug 2019

Bibliographical note

' © 2019 Versace et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.'

Keywords

cardiac care
accessibility
aftercare cardiac access
Australia

Access to Document

10.1371/journal.pone.0221465Licence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{ba1cf597274c45948c311140b27f72bc,

title = "Correction: Comparison of general and cardiac care-specific indices of spatial access in Australia",

abstract = "There are errors in the captions for Tables 2 and 3, Figs 2 and 3. Please see the complete, correct Tables 2 and 3, Figs 2 and 3 captions here. Download: PPT PowerPoint slide PNG larger image TIFF original image Table 2. Australian localities by Cardiac ARIA (acute) and ARIA+ Categories.Red shading indicates good acute cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Blue shading indicates poor acute cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Localities displayed in Fig 1 and Fig 2. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465.t001Table 3. Australian localities by Cardiac ARIA (aftercare) and ARIA+ Categories.Red shading indicates good aftercare cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Blue shading indicates poor aftercare cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Localities displayed in Fig 3 and Fig 4. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465.t002Fig 2. The geographical locations of the shaded cells from Table 2 highlighting the main discrepancies between Cardiac ARIA (after) and the ARIA+ remoteness structure [24] (low acute cardiac services relative to ARIA+) (n = 75). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465.g001Fig 3. The geographical locations of the shaded cells from Table 3 highlighting the main discrepancies between Cardiac ARIA (acute) and the ARIA+ remoteness structure [24] (high aftercare cardiac services relative to ARIA+) (n = 876).Reference1. Versace VL, Coffee NT, Franzon J, Turner D, Lange J, Taylor D, et al. (2019) Comparison of general and cardiac care-specific indices of spatial access in Australia. PLoS ONE 14(7): e0219959. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219959 pmid:31344082 ",

keywords = "cardiac care, accessibility, aftercare cardiac access, Australia",

author = "Versace, {Vincent Lawrence} and Coffee, {Neil T.} and Julie Franzon and Dorothy Turner and Jarrod Lange and Danielle Taylor and Robyn Clark",

note = "' {\textcopyright} 2019 Versace et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.'",

year = "2019",

month = aug,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0221465",

language = "English",

volume = "14",

journal = "PLoS One",

issn = "1932-6203",

publisher = "PlosOne",

number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Correction

T2 - Comparison of general and cardiac care-specific indices of spatial access in Australia

AU - Versace, Vincent Lawrence

AU - Coffee, Neil T.

AU - Franzon, Julie

AU - Turner, Dorothy

AU - Lange, Jarrod

AU - Taylor, Danielle

AU - Clark, Robyn

N1 - ' © 2019 Versace et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.'

PY - 2019/8/1

Y1 - 2019/8/1

N2 - There are errors in the captions for Tables 2 and 3, Figs 2 and 3. Please see the complete, correct Tables 2 and 3, Figs 2 and 3 captions here. Download: PPT PowerPoint slide PNG larger image TIFF original image Table 2. Australian localities by Cardiac ARIA (acute) and ARIA+ Categories.Red shading indicates good acute cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Blue shading indicates poor acute cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Localities displayed in Fig 1 and Fig 2. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465.t001Table 3. Australian localities by Cardiac ARIA (aftercare) and ARIA+ Categories.Red shading indicates good aftercare cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Blue shading indicates poor aftercare cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Localities displayed in Fig 3 and Fig 4. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465.t002Fig 2. The geographical locations of the shaded cells from Table 2 highlighting the main discrepancies between Cardiac ARIA (after) and the ARIA+ remoteness structure [24] (low acute cardiac services relative to ARIA+) (n = 75). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465.g001Fig 3. The geographical locations of the shaded cells from Table 3 highlighting the main discrepancies between Cardiac ARIA (acute) and the ARIA+ remoteness structure [24] (high aftercare cardiac services relative to ARIA+) (n = 876).Reference1. Versace VL, Coffee NT, Franzon J, Turner D, Lange J, Taylor D, et al. (2019) Comparison of general and cardiac care-specific indices of spatial access in Australia. PLoS ONE 14(7): e0219959. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219959 pmid:31344082

AB - There are errors in the captions for Tables 2 and 3, Figs 2 and 3. Please see the complete, correct Tables 2 and 3, Figs 2 and 3 captions here. Download: PPT PowerPoint slide PNG larger image TIFF original image Table 2. Australian localities by Cardiac ARIA (acute) and ARIA+ Categories.Red shading indicates good acute cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Blue shading indicates poor acute cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Localities displayed in Fig 1 and Fig 2. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465.t001Table 3. Australian localities by Cardiac ARIA (aftercare) and ARIA+ Categories.Red shading indicates good aftercare cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Blue shading indicates poor aftercare cardiac services relative to the ARIA+ category. Localities displayed in Fig 3 and Fig 4. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465.t002Fig 2. The geographical locations of the shaded cells from Table 2 highlighting the main discrepancies between Cardiac ARIA (after) and the ARIA+ remoteness structure [24] (low acute cardiac services relative to ARIA+) (n = 75). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221465.g001Fig 3. The geographical locations of the shaded cells from Table 3 highlighting the main discrepancies between Cardiac ARIA (acute) and the ARIA+ remoteness structure [24] (high aftercare cardiac services relative to ARIA+) (n = 876).Reference1. Versace VL, Coffee NT, Franzon J, Turner D, Lange J, Taylor D, et al. (2019) Comparison of general and cardiac care-specific indices of spatial access in Australia. PLoS ONE 14(7): e0219959. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219959 pmid:31344082

KW - cardiac care

KW - accessibility

KW - aftercare cardiac access

KW - Australia

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070741868&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0221465

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0221465

M3 - Comment/debate

C2 - 31415666

AN - SCOPUS:85070741868

SN - 1932-6203

VL - 14

JO - PLoS One

JF - PLoS One

IS - 7

M1 - e0221465

ER -

Correction: Comparison of general and cardiac care-specific indices of spatial access in Australia

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Comparison of general and cardiac care-specific indices of spatial access in Australia

Cite this