This article is a correction to:
Expert Arguments for Trends of Psychiatric Bed Numbers: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Data
Adrian P. Mundt1,2*
Sabine Delhey Langerfeldt1
Enzo Rozas Serri1,3
Mathias Siebenförcher4*
Stefan Priebe5- 1Medical Faculty, Universidad Diego Portales, Santiago, Chile
- 2Departamento de Neurología y Psiquiatría, Clínica Alemana de Santiago, Facultad de Medicina Clínica Alemana, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile
- 3Department of Psychiatry and Mental Health, Hospital Clínico Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile
- 4Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Campus Mitte, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- 5Unit for Social and Community Psychiatry (WHO Collaborating Centre for Mental Health Service Development), Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
A corrigendum on
Expert arguments for trends of psychiatric bed numbers: A systematic review of qualitative data
by Mundt, A. P., Delhey Langerfeldt, S., Rozas Serri, E., Siebenförcher, M., and Priebe, S. (2021). Front. Psychiatry 12:745247. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.745247
In the original article, there was a mistake in Table 2 as published.
TABLE 2
Table 2. Number of expert arguments per theme and country.
Column headings are labeled as “High- and upper-middle income countries (HIC)“ and ”Lower-Middle and Low-Income countries (LMIC)“. The heading should read ”High-Income Countries (HIC)“ and ”Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC),“ respectively.
Zeros were erroneously inserted in several lines that should have been blank,
On page 12
1.1. Cost effectiveness
1.2 Inappropriate use of inpatient care
1.4. Quality of care is maintained or improved with less beds
1.5. Less psychiatric bed needs
On page 13
Expert arguments to increase or maintain psychiatric bed numbers
2.1 Lack of beds for financial pressure
2.3 High demand of psychiatric beds
2.4 Inadequately short length of stay
2.6. Lack of locally available beds
2.7 Lack of beds compromises quality of care
2.12 Lack of affordable and supported housing services
The numbers for those headings are reported in the subordinate points.
Finally, only in the PDF version of the published article, an error occurs in the heading of the first column in Table 2. The statement “Expert arguments to reduce psychiatric bed numbers,” which is correctly inserted on page 12, is erroneously repeated on pages 13 and 14. Instead, the correct column heading on pages 13 and 14 is “Expert arguments to increase or maintain psychiatric bed numbers.”
The corrected Table 2 is shown below.
The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Keywords: psychiatric hospital beds, general hospital psychiatry, institutionalization, expert recommendation, consensus, inpatient, length of stay
Citation: Mundt AP, Delhey Langerfeldt S, Rozas Serri E, Siebenförcher M and Priebe S (2022) Corrigendum: Expert arguments for trends of psychiatric bed numbers: A systematic review of qualitative data. Front. Psychiatry 13:957272. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.957272
Received: 30 May 2022; Accepted: 11 July 2022;
Published: 02 August 2022.
Edited and reviewed by: Anastasia Theodoridou, Psychiatric University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland
Copyright © 2022 Mundt, Delhey Langerfeldt, Rozas Serri, Siebenförcher and Priebe. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Adrian P. Mundt, YWRyaWFuLm11bmR0JiN4MDAwNDA7bWFpbC51ZHAuY2w=; Mathias Siebenförcher, bWF0aGlhcy5zaWViZW5mb2VyY2hlciYjeDAwMDQwO2NoYXJpdGUuZGU=