Article Text

PDF

Correction: Efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological and non-biological pharmacological treatment: a systematic literature review informing the 2016 update of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of axial spondyloarthritis
  1. Natalie Bryan
  1. BMJ, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Natalie Bryan; production.rmdopen{at}bmj.com

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Regel A, Sepriano A, Baraliakos X, et al. Efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological and non-biological pharmacological treatment: a systematic literature review informing the 2016 update of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of axial spondyloarthritis. RMD Open 2017;3:e000397.

This article has been corrected since it was first published. Several changes have been made to the tables.

  • Accepted February 5, 2017.
View Abstract

Footnotes

  • Contributors KB: contributed to the design of the study, acquisition and analysis of the data. Furthermore, he drafted the manuscript and give final approvement of the submitted version of the manuscript.

    AV: contributed to the design of the study and interpretation of the analysis of the data. Furthermore, he critically revised the manuscript and give final approvement of the submitted version of the manuscript.

    FO: contributed to the design of the study and acquisition of the data. Furthermore, he critically revised the manuscript and give final approvement of the submitted version of the manuscript.

    PvR: contributed to the design of the study and interpretation of the analysis of the data. Furthermore, he critically revised the manuscript and give final approvement of the submitted version of the manuscript.

    MV: contributed to the conception and the design of the study and interpretation of the analysis of the data. Furthermore, she critically revised the manuscript and give final approvement of the submitted version of the manuscript.

    All authors agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent According to Dutch law and regulations, the study was exempted from approval of a medical ethical committee and no informed consent was required, since this was an observational, non-interventional study.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.