This article is a correction to the original systematic review and meta-analysis that estimated the proportion of clinically suspected cholera cases that are true Vibrio cholerae O1/O139 infections[1][2][4]. The authors reviewed 119 studies from 30 countries that tested at least 10 suspected cases by culture, PCR or rapid diagnostic test[4][5][8]. They estimated the sensitivity and specificity of the tests by latent class meta-analysis and the positivity of V. cholerae by random effects meta-analysis with adjustment for test performance[4][8]. Positivity was lower in studies with a representative sample and with a minimum age in the definition of a suspected case[4]. Burden estimates based only on suspected cases may overestimate the incidence of medically treated cholera by a factor of two[4][5]. The high variability between studies requires the use of local data to extrapolate from suspected to confirmed cases[4][5]. A limitation was that the method did not explain all heterogeneity and did not account for cases missed by clinical follow-up[4].