Suppr超能文献

作者更正:多巴胺依赖的前额叶再激活解释了恐惧消退的长期益处。

Author Correction: Dopamine-dependent prefrontal reactivations explain long-term benefit of fear extinction.

作者信息

Gerlicher A M V, Tüscher O, Kalisch R

机构信息

Neuroimaging Center (NIC), Focus Program Translational Neuroscience (FTN), Johannes Gutenberg University Medical Center, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.

Deutsches Resilienz Zentrum (DRZ), Johannes Gutenberg University Medical Center, Untere Zahlbacher Str. 8, 55131, Mainz, Germany.

出版信息

Nat Commun. 2019 Jan 23;10(1):471. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-08399-4.

Abstract

In the original version of this Article, the fourth sentence of the legend to Figure 1b incorrectly read "Note, that the group difference stemmed from significantly smaller CS+ evoked SCRs averaged across the whole test phase, but the speed of re-extinction did not differ significantly between drug groups (control analysis with stimulus (CS+, CS-) and trial (1-10) as within-, and group (placebo, L-DOPA) as between-subject factor: stimulus × group, F = 6.57, P = 0.02, partial η = 0.17; stimulus × trial × group, F = 1.32, P = 0.23; n = 35)". The correct version states "F = 6.58" instead of "F = 6.57", and "F = 1.32" instead of "F = 1.32". These errors have now been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article. The correct values were used in the statistical analysis and the errors do not affect the conclusions.

摘要

在本文的原始版本中,图1b图例的第四句错误地表述为“注意,组间差异源于在整个测试阶段平均而言显著更小的CS +诱发的皮肤电反应,但药物组之间重新消退的速度没有显著差异(以刺激(CS +,CS -)和试验(1 - 10)作为组内因素,组(安慰剂,左旋多巴)作为组间因素进行对照分析:刺激×组,F = 6.57,P = 0.02,偏η = 0.17;刺激×试验×组,F = 1.32,P = 0.23;n = 35)”。正确的版本是“F = 6.58”而非“F = 6.57”,以及“F = 1.32”而非“F = 1.32”。这些错误现已在本文的PDF和HTML版本中得到纠正。统计分析中使用的是正确的值,这些错误不影响结论。

相似文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验