Correction: Medkour et al. Adenovirus Infections in African Humans and Wild Non-Human Primates: Great Diversity and Cross-Species Transmission. Viruses 2020, 12, 657

In the original publication [1], the sections titled “Institutional Review Board Statement” and “Informed Consent Statement” were not clearly defined. We have now added these two sections as follows:

• Institutional Review Board Statement: Due to the nature of the study, which involved strictly non-invasive sample collection, and considering the regulatory context at the time of sample collection, formal approval from an Institutional Review Board or National Ethics Committee was not required. In Senegal in 2016, the study was conducted in accordance with the authorization granted by the Direction des Eaux, Forêts, Chasses et Conservation des Sols of the Republic of Senegal (No. 1914/DEF/DGF, 5 June 2016). In the Republic of Congo in 2015, in the absence of a National Ethics Committee at the time of sample collection, and following the requirements of the only competent authority, the Ministry of Health and Population, an official research authorization was obtained (No. 00208/MSP/CAB.15, 20 August 2015). In the Republic of Congo in 2017, the study was conducted in accordance with the authorization granted by the Ministry of Health and Population through an official Ordre de Mission (No. 000220/MSP-CAB-17, 23 October 2017).
• Informed Consent Statement: Verbal informed consent was obtained from the participants. Verbal consent was obtained rather than written because in rural areas, obtaining written informed consent is constrained by sociocultural, educational, and linguistic factors. Low literacy levels, particularly among adult and elderly populations, limit participants’ ability to meaningfully engage with written consent forms. In addition, written documents are often perceived as administrative or legal instruments, which may generate mistrust or reluctance to participate. Linguistic diversity further complicates the use of written consent, as study documents are typically drafted in French while participants primarily communicate in local languages. In this context, oral informed consent was obtained from all participants following a clear explanation of the study objectives, procedures, potential benefits, and risks in the participant’s native language. Participation was voluntary, refusal entailed no consequences, and no personally identifiable information was collected. When appropriate, consent was obtained in the presence of a witness.

The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.