Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(1)
In sample 1, ICCs ranged between 0.73 and 0.89 across the six domains and summary index, with the exception of the Risky Activities domain where the ICC was 0.57.
Similar(59)
Intraclass correlation coefficients were most consistent for Method 2 (ICC 0.93-0.96) followed by Method 1 (ICC 0.88-0.91) and Method 3 (ICC 0.81-0.87).
There are two versions of the test (different clinical scenarios for each test) and ICC scores for subtests were, Version 1: ICC, 0.80-0.96; Version 2: 0.68-0.94 and ICC for total scores were Version 1: ICC, 0.96; Version 2: ICC, 0.91.
Fitting DMM for polytomous items within MSPWin only orders the m-1 ICCs within each item, but not the items themselves [ 7] and therefore IIO is not assured.
For polytomously scored items with m response categories and m-1 ICCs for every item, non-intersection does not guarantee IIO (for details see [ 13]).
HER2 expression was performed in 10 ICCs, 19 ECCs and 10 GBCs, according to sample availability.
According to Portney and Watkins [ 32] ICCs above 0.75 indicate good reliability.
In the late phase, all 50 ICCs and 50 HCCs were hypoenhanced.
miRNA expression profiles of 63 ICCs and nine NIBD were detected using our custom miRNA microarray.
This method involves computing standardized scores (i.e. z-scores) using the following formula (Newson [2002]): (c) z = ( icc 1 − icc 2 ) ( se 1 2 + se 2 2 ) . z = ( icc 1 − icc 2 ) ( se 1 2 + se 2 2 ).
Five of the 18 ICC judges are African.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com