GeneralCorrection
Corrections to Mason DC et al. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2009;109:87-91 and DiLullo C. [BOOK REVIEW] 2009;109: 75,101-102.
J Osteopath Med; 109(7): 388-388
Abstract
The JAOA deeply regrets that several editing errors were made in the following book review: DiLullo C, reviewer. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2009;109: 75,101-102. Review of: Rohen JW. Functional Morphology: The Dynamic Wholeness of the Human Organism. These edits were not approved by the book reviewer prior to publication. The changes detailed below, which restore the reviewer’s original intent, were made to the full text and Adobe Portable Document Format versions of this piece online. Page 101—The fourth sentence of the fourth paragraph in the second column mistakenly read as follows: ”In the endocrine system, the pituitary gland is designated as the thinking element based on its anatomic location. However, this gland is also characterized as a major metabolic regulator, suggesting instead that it should perhaps be depicted as the willing element.” The passage should have been printed as follows: “In the endocrine system, the pituitary gland is designated as the thinking element based on its anatomic location, but this gland is also characterized as a major metabolic regulator, indicating it could alternatively be depicted as the willing element.” In addition, the first sentence of the next paragraph was erroneously published as follows: “The threefoldness dogma extends through the book’s concluding section where the author addresses the process of evolution and our place in the cosmos.” Instead, this sentence should have been published as originally approved by the book reviewer: “The threefoldness dogma is extended in the book’s concluding section to correlate with the process of evolution and our place in the cosmos.” Finally, in the next column, the seventh paragraph appeared as shown: “Although Dr Rohen makes it clear that the human species is still evolving, he promotes a view of human evolution in which the endpoint is the achievement of a state of selflessness and pure form. In this pure form, the ultimate evolutionary possibility of the human being is resurrection.” Instead, the paragraph should have read as follows: “Although Dr Rohen makes it clear that the human species is still considered to be evolving, he offers for consideration a view in which the endpoint of human evolution may be the achievement of a state of selflessness and pure form. In this pure form, the ultimate evolutionary possibility is resurrection.” ▫ Page 102—The concluding paragraph originally appeared as follows: “To gain an appreciation of the full scope of Dr Rohen’s philosophical treatise, it must be read to the very last page. And yet, though Functional Morphology is an intriguing text, it is but a single interpretation of a very broad and complex set of data.” The book reviewer’s approved concluding paragraph should instead have been published: “Functional Morphology is certainly an intriguing text. However, it must be read to the very last page to appreciate the full scope of Dr Rohen’s philosophical treatise and to understand that this work is but a single interpretation of a very broad and complex set of data.” In addition, the JAOA and the lead author regret an error that appeared in the following article: Mason DC, Ciervo CA. Brachial plexus injuries in neonates: an osteopathic approach. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2009;109:87-91. On page 90, the work and recommendations of Benjamin M. Sucher, DO, were presented inaccurately. Likewise, the authors’ opinions were inappropriately attributed to Dr Sucher: Sucher25-27 recommends that manual treatment for patients with thoracic outlet syndrome focus on the use of myofascial techniques. If an osteopathic physician finds decreased range of motion or hypertonicity in the myofascial structures around the thoracic inlet unilaterally, Sucher25-27 suggests the use of gentle myofascial stretching. We believe that the same principle applies to infants with brachial plexus injuries. Instead, the first paragraph under “Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment” should have appeared as follows: Dr Sucher’s articles25-27 on treating adult patients with thoracic outlet syndrome focus on myofascial restrictions and aggressive myofascial stretching techniques. We believe that if the osteopathic physician determines that there is decreased range of motion or hypertonicity in the myofascial structures around the thoracic inlet unilaterally in neonates, then gentle myofascial stretching may be used, along with careful patient monitoring, to remove the somatic dysfunctions and restore normal anatomic relationships around the thoracic inlet area. These changes were made to the full text and Adobe Portable Document format versions of this article online.