Advertisement

Corrections to: The Effect of Nordic Hamstring Exercise Intervention Volume on Eccentric Strength and Muscle Architecture Adaptations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analyses

  • Matthew CuthbertEmail author
  • Nicholas Ripley
  • John J. McMahon
  • Martin Evans
  • G. Gregory Haff
  • Paul Comfort
Open Access
Correction
  • 299 Downloads

1 Correction to: Sports Medicine  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-019-01178-7

Page 5, column 1, section 3.2, paragraph 1, sentence 1: The following sentence, which previously read:

“Consistency between the studies assessed for both hamstring strength measures and muscle architecture was moderate to high, with I2 values of 62.49% and 88.03%, respectively.”

Should read:

“Consistency between the studies assessed for both hamstring strength measures and muscle architecture was moderate to high, with I2 values of 58.58% and 88.03%, respectively.”

Page 5, columns 1–2, section 3.2, paragraph 1, sentence 3: The following sentence, which previously read:

“Two risk of bias assessments were also performed, the first (Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool) showing a low risk of bias overall within the randomized controlled studies included in this review (Fig. 2), the second identifying the results of this meta-analysis are not subject to publication bias (p < 0.001) with 250 and 663 “filed-away” studies needed to prove null effects of NHE interventions on strength and architecture, respectively.”

Should read:

“Two risk of bias assessments were also performed, the first (Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool) showing a low risk of bias overall within the randomized controlled studies included in this review (Fig. 2), the second identifying the results of this meta-analysis are not subject to publication bias (p < 0.001) with 178 and 663 “filed-away” studies needed to prove null effects of NHE interventions on strength and architecture, respectively.”

Pages 5–6, columns 2 (page 5) and 1 (page 6), section 3.3, paragraph 1, sentence 6: The following sentence, which previously read:

“The pooled summary of variance from the random-effects model was 0.374 (p = 0.009, 95% CI 0.94–0.655) for strength and 0.793 (p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.338–1.248) for muscle architecture.”

Should read:

“The pooled summary of variance from the random-effects model was 0.439 (p = 0.001, 95% CI 0.160–0.709) for strength and 0.793 (p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.338–1.248) for muscle architecture.”

Page 11, Table 1, Alt et al. [58] row: The cell entry in column 1, which previously read:

“Alt et al. [58]”

Should read:

“Alt et al. [48]”

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

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.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Human Performance LaboratoryUniversity of SalfordGreater ManchesterUK
  2. 2.The FA Group, St George’s ParkBurton-upon-TrentUK
  3. 3.Centre for Exercise and Sports Sciences Research (CESSR), School of Exercise and Health SciencesEdith Cowan UniversityJoondalupAustralia
  4. 4.Institute for Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure, Carnegie School of SportLeeds Beckett UniversityLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations