Email this article 
Ошибки в статье «Сравнительный анализ липидома и транскриптома мозолистого тела головного мозга при шизофрении и в здоровом состоянии» (Consortium PSYCHIATRICUM, 2025, Т. 6, № 1, doi: 10.17816/CP15491)
- Section: ERRATUM
- Submitted: 21.04.2025
- Accepted: 05.05.2025
- URL: https://consortium-psy.com/jour/article/view/15673
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/CP15673
- ID: 15673
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
In the article by M.S. Osetrova et al. titled "Comparative Analysis of Corpus Callosum Lipidome and Transcriptome in Schizophrenia and Healthy Brain", published in the Consortium PSYCHIATRICUM journal (Volume 6, Issue 1), the editorial team made some technical errors. Without any malicious intent, the quantitative indicators in Figure 1 "Experiment design" were incorrectly stated: 1,254 genes instead of 14,254 in the RNAseq section and 385 peaks instead of 384 in the LC-MS section.
The technical errors in Figure 1 have been corrected, and updated PDF and HTML versions of the article have been uploaded on the journal's website. The editorial team of the journal hopes that the mistakes could not significantly affect the perception and interpretation of the published work by readers, and should not become the reason for retraction. The editorial team apologizes to the authors and readers for the mistakes made.
Full Text
In the article by M.S. Osetrova et al. titled "Comparative Analysis of Corpus Callosum Lipidome and Transcriptome in Schizophrenia and Healthy Brain", published in the Consortium PSYCHIATRICUM journal (Volume 6, Issue 1), the editorial team made some technical errors. Without any malicious intent, the quantitative indicators in Figure 1 "Experiment design" were incorrectly stated: 1,254 genes instead of 14,254 in the RNAseq section and 385 peaks instead of 384 in the LC-MS section.
The technical errors in Figure 1 have been corrected, and updated PDF and HTML versions of the article have been uploaded on the journal's website. The editorial team of the journal hopes that the mistakes could not significantly affect the perception and interpretation of the published work by readers, and should not become the reason for retraction. The editorial team apologizes to the authors and readers for the mistakes made.
Supplementary files
