Mohammad Hosseini Hooshiar1
Mohammad Sholeh
Masoumeh Beig
Ebrahim Kouhsari
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
- 1Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
- 2Department of Bacteriology, Pasteur Institute of Iran, Tehran, Iran
- 3Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences, Sanandaj, Iran
- 4Zoonoses Research Center, Research Institute for Health Development, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences, Sanandaj, Iran
- 5Laboratory Sciences Research Center, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
- 6Department of Laboratory Sciences, Faculty of Paramedicine, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
A Corrigendum on
Global trends of antimicrobial resistance rates in Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analysis
by Hooshiar MH, Sholeh M, Beig M, Azizian K and Kouhsari E (2024). Front. Pharmacol. 15:1284665. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1284665
In the published article, there was an error in Figure 3 as published. There was an inaccuracy in the information regarding ciprofloxacin resistance in New Zealand. The corrected Figure 3 and its caption appear below.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Global map of reported weighted pooled resistance rates for spectinomycin (A) and ciprofloxacin (B).
In the published article, there was an error in Supplementary Data Sheet 2. In Supplementary Figure S2 ‘Forest plot for the ciprofloxacin resistance rate stratified by countries’, data for New Zealand erroneously appears on 2 lines. The line indicating 126 ciprofloxacin resistant isolates out of 398 is the correct information. The second line (indicating 28 resistant isolates out of 28) is wrong and has been removed. The correct material statement appears below.
Supplementary Figure S2 | Forest plot for the ciprofloxacin resistance rate stratified by countries.supplementary-material.
In the published article, there was an error. Figure 3 has been updated to reflect that the correct data for New Zealand ciprofloxacin resistance is 126/398. This means that the correlating text related to Figure 3 must also be updated.
A correction has been made to Results, Ciprofloxacin resistance, Paragraph Number 1. This sentence previously stated:
“Among the 58 countries that reported resistance rates for ciprofloxacin, 25 (43.1%) countries, namely, Kyrgyzstan, Ghana, Côte d’Ivoire, Bhutan, Laos, the Philippines, Argentina, Spain, Taiwan, Pakistan, Iran, Uganda, Poland, Hungary, Morocco, Kenya, Korea, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Vietnam, Germany, India, Bangladesh, and China, reported ciprofloxacin resistance in more than 50% of isolates (Figure 3).”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“Among the 58 countries that reported resistance rates for ciprofloxacin, 24 (41.3%) countries, namely, Kyrgyzstan, Ghana, Côte d’Ivoire, Bhutan, Laos, the Philippines, Argentina, Spain, Taiwan, Pakistan, Iran, Uganda, Poland, Hungary, Morocco, Kenya, Korea, Norway, Pakistan, Vietnam, Germany, India, Bangladesh, and China, reported ciprofloxacin resistance in more than 50% of isolates (Figure 3).”
The authors apologize for these errors 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: Neisseria gonorrhoeae, antimicrobial resistance, systematic review and meta-analysis, spectinomycin, gonorrhea
Citation: Hooshiar MH, Sholeh M, Beig M, Azizian K and Kouhsari E (2024) Corrigendum: Global trends of antimicrobial resistance rates in Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front. Pharmacol. 15:1465628. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1465628
Received: 16 July 2024; Accepted: 19 August 2024;
Published: 03 September 2024.
Edited and reviewed by:
Myron Christodoulides, University of Southampton, United KingdomCopyright © 2024 Hooshiar, Sholeh, Beig, Azizian and Kouhsari. 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: Ebrahim Kouhsari, ZWtvdWhzYXJpMTk4N0BnbWFpbC5jb20=; Khalil Azizian, ay5heml6aWFuODZAZ21haWwuY29t
†These authors have contributed equally to this work