Erratum to ‘Continued abuse of causal inference in studies of antimicrobial resistance: revisiting the confusion between ecological correlation and causation' [Journal of Global Antimicrobial Resistance 30 (2022) 485-486]

The publisher regrets that some numbering within the first paragraph appeared as references rather than a list of three points. The correct paragraph should read: In a research article fraught with errors, inaccuracies, statistical abuses and misstatements, Yin et al. [1] state in their Highlights section that i) ‘Nontyphoidal Salmonella resistant to fluoroquinolone drugs were isolated from retail meats’, ii) ‘An increase in resistance to fluoroquinolone in nontyphoidal Salmonella from retail meat sources was correlated with an increase in the sale of these drugs for use in agricultural settings’, and iii) ‘This study expands our understanding of potential drivers of fluoroquinolone resistance among nontyphoidal Salmonella ’. None of these statements is factual. Unfortunately, this team of authors promoted these false conclusions through various social media outlets, making it difficult to rectify the egregious errors committed in this article. Because this is peer-reviewed research, anyone who received the public relations blasts directed by this research team or the media publicity that was generated will now assume that these conclusions are true and correct. Previously, this paragraph was erroneously formatted as follows: In a research article fraught with errors, inaccuracies, statistical abuses and misstatements, Yin et al. [1] state in their Highlights section that [1] ‘Nontyphoidal Salmonella resistant to fluoroquinolone drugs were isolated from retail meats’, [2] ‘An increase in resistance to fluoroquinolone in nontyphoidal Salmonella from retail meat sources was correlated with an increase in the sale of these drugs for use in agricultural settings’, and [3] ‘This study expands our understanding of potential drivers of fluoroquinolone resistance among nontyphoidal Salmonella ’. None of these statements is factual. Unfortunately, this team of authors promoted these false conclusions through various social media outlets, making it difficult to rectify the egregious errors committed in this article. Because this is peer-reviewed research, anyone who received the public relations blasts directed by this research team or the media publicity that was generated will now assume that these conclusions are true and correct. The publisher would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.