On page 778, in the “Mean Difference Example” section of the article, the following sentence should be removed: “We used their exact dataset; however, we applied a random-effects model, which is appropriate for reflecting variability in real-world clinical settings, whereas their meta-analysis employed a fixed-effect model.”

The section should read as follows:

“We reproduced the data from the meta-analysis by Papageorgiou et al. 6 to evaluate the response to periodontal treatment by comparing changes in probing depth between patients with overweight or obesity and normal-weight patients. Two types of forest plots were generated: a conventional forest plot (Fig 1, A ) and a CEF (Fig 1, B ). The conventional forest plot indicates that the change in probing depth for patients with overweight or obesity is statistically significant (MD,–0.069 [95% CI,–0.133 to–0.004]); however, it provides no information about the clinical relevance of this effect. In contrast, the CEF clearly demonstrates that the observed effect is small and, therefore, not clinically meaningful.”

The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.