There was an error in the August issue of the journal (Dodds JP, Johnson AM, Parry JV, et al. A tale of three cities: persisting high HIV prevalence, risk behaviour and undiagnosed infection in community samples of men who have sex with men. Sex Transm Infect 2007;83:392–6.) The last sentence on page 2 should read as follows: “All were screened by GACELISA HIV 1 and 2, whose sensitivity and specificity had been determined as 99.5% (95% CI 97.1% to 99.9%) and 99.7% (95% CI 98.9% to 99.9%), respectively.^{13 14}