Author Correction: A meta-analysis indicating extra-short implants (≤ 6 mm) as an alternative to longer implants (≥ 8 mm) with bone augmentation (Scientific Reports, (2021), 11, 1, (8152), 10.1038/s41598-021-87507-1)

Abstract

The original version of this Article contained an error in Table 2, where the overall evaluation in row “Guida et al. 2020” was incorrect, “(?) some concerns”. now reads: “(+) low risk”. The original Table 2 and accompanying legend appear below. As a result, in the Results section, under subsection ‘Result, Risk of bias and quality of evidence’, “Five studies were considered as having a high risk of bias, and judgments expressed “some concern” in eight studies, while the remaining were characterized by a low risk of bias.” now reads: “Five studies were considered as having a high risk of bias, and judgments expressed “some concern” in seven studies, while the remaining were characterized by a low risk of bias.” The original Article has been corrected.