Response to “Serious Flaws Challenge the Conclusions in a Revision of a Retracted Meta-Analysis”

Abstract

we felt duty bound to rerun the analyses with the correct data and undergo a second round of peer review to provide some comfort and assurance to researchers who had cited our original article in good faith. As is now apparent, with the exception of the association of work stress with the cortisol awakening response, the errors in the data entry did not result in substantive changes to the conclusions reached in our original article. Finally, we can confirm that data entry errors in the original article were not replicated in the sister meta-analysis articles (3,4).