The authors regret an error in one of the extracted data points in the meta-analysis. The classification accuracy for Serretti et al. (2007) was corrected to 64% (Table 3b). The overall results before and after this correction remain directionally consistent and are summarized below (Figures 2 and 3; Table 2; results subsection 3.6). The authors apologise for any inconvenience caused.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.