The author regrets that a citation meant to be included in the Reference list was instead incorporated into the text itself.
The sixth paragraph of the article should read:
“Fortunately, advances in technology offer solutions to the issues of both cost and scarcity. Using standard consumer 3D-printers, my team and I were able to generate and assemble 1000 durable, re-wearable, high-filtration respirators with a cost in materials of only approximately $1−2 each, we distributed the 3d printed respirators to the homeless in Miami.7 Printed out of cheap polylactic acid or thermoplastic polyurethane and secured firmly with elastic straps fastened with a proprietary plastic backplate, these respirators used high-efficiency particulate air filters comparable to those used in N95s. In recently published research in The American Journal of Medicine, we established via fit testing trials employing a particle counter that these masks offered a superior fit factor to even N95s and were more likely to fit a large variety of face shapes and sizes.8”
Accordingly, the numbering of the citations should be re-ordered as follows:
7. Penn State College of Medicine student creates masks for the homeless using 3-D printer. https://www.abc27.com/news/health/coronavirus/coronavirus-pennsylvania/penn-state-college-of-medicine-student-creates-masksfor-the-homeless-using-3-d-printer/. Accessed June 11, 2022.
8. Levine M, Levine L, Xun H, et al. Face off: 3D printed masks as a costeffective and reusable alternative to N95 respirators: a feasibility study. Am J Med. 135(9); 2022; 1109-1115. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2022.04.026. Accessed June 11, 2022.
The author would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.
Article info
Publication history
Published online: December 30, 2022
Identification
Copyright
© 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
ScienceDirect
Access this article on ScienceDirectLinked Article
- A More Fitting Approach to Mask PolicyThe American Journal of MedicineVol. 135Issue 11
- PreviewThroughout the COVID-19 pandemic, one of the central public policy debates has revolved around masking requirements as a mitigation technique to impede the spread of transmission. Controversy arose over masking mandates that were implemented across American society at various levels, some at the behest of individual businesses and others via the edict of municipal or state governments. At the federal level, Executive Orders issued during the first week of the Biden administration made masking a requirement on federal property (including National Parks) and on commercial transportation such as trains, ferries, buses, and airplanes.
- Full-Text
- Preview
