The article entitled "Systematic Review and Metaanalysis Comparing the Bias and Accuracy of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration Equations in Community-Based Populations,"by Emily C. McFadden, Jennifer A. Hirst, Jan Y. Verbakel, Julie H. McLellan, F.D. Richard Hobbs, Richard J. Stevens, Chris A. O'Callaghan, and Daniel S. Lasserson (Clin Chem 2018;64:475-85), published in the March 2018 issue of Clinical Chemistry, contains errors. In the Results section, under "Difference in Bias between CKD-EPI and MDRD Equations for eGFR"(page 479), the penultimate sentence of the paragraph should read, "Bias in the CKD-EPI equation was on average lower than mGFR by 2.8 mL/min/1.73 m2 (95% CI, -0.4 to 6.0) with variation between studies (I2 99.0; P<0.0001) (Fig. 3)."Figure 3 is correct and unchanged. In the Discussion (page 479), the opening sentence should read, "In populations relevant to primary care, we found that both the MDRD and CKD-EPI equations underestimated GFR, though the estimate for CKD-EPI was not significantly different from mGFR. Estimates from CKD-EPI were slightly more accurate than those from MDRD."In view of these changes, the abstract conclusion should read "Both equations may underestimate mGFR, but CKD-EPI gave more accurate estimates of GFR."The authors regret the errors.