Erratum: An economic analysis of the health-related benefits associated with bicycle infrastructure investment in three Canadian cities (PLOS ONE (2021) 16:2 (e0246419) 10.1371/journal.pone.0246419)

Abstract

There are errors in the in-text citations for the Supporting Information tables. SM1 refers to S1 Table, SM2 refers to S2 Table, and SM3 refers to S3 Table. In the Methods section, the heading “Health economic assessment tool” should be written as “Health Economic Assessment Tool”. The Fig 2 caption is formatted incorrectly. Please see the complete, correct Fig 2 caption here: (Figure presented) (Table presented) The S3 Table caption is formatted incorrectly. Please see the complete, correct S3 Table caption here: S3 Table. Benefit:cost ratios and the change in the benefit term (when compared with the respective primary analysis) for the 32 univariate sensitivity analyses, by study city. For comparison, the benefit:cost ratios in the primary analyses for Victoria, Kelowna and Halifax were 1.7:1, 1.9:1 and 2.1:1, respectively.