Corrigendum

In my editors choice of June 2010 [1] I inadvertently misquoted the paper by Al-Zirqi et al. (Uterine rupture after previous caesarean section. Al-Zirqi I, Stray-Pedersen B, Forsén L, Vangen S. BJOG 2010 Jun;117(7):809–20) when I wrote: ‘But what about the 15.9% risk of uterine rupture following induction of labour with prostaglandins/amniotomy? Personally, I could not present a risk of one in six to mothers as “a low absolute risk”, as maintained by some commentators.’ This should have read: ‘But what about the 1.59% risk of uterine rupture following induction of labour with prostaglandins/amniotomy? Personally, I could not present a risk of one in sixty to mothers as “a low absolute risk”, as maintained by some commentators.’