Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(8)
The arthroscopy confirmed that 486 patients (524 joints) were in an adhesion group and 1020 patients (1298 joints) were in a non-adhesion group.
There were significant differences between the adhesion group and the non-adhesion group for all of the items (P < 0.001) stated above with the exception of clicking duration.
1506 patients (1822 joints) with ID were divided into an adhesion group (486 patients) and a non-adhesion group (1020 patients).
The patients in this study with ID stages II~V were divided into an adhesion group and a non-adhesion group.
From the statistical data, we knew that the patients' age and the locking duration in the adhesion group were higher than in the non-adhesion group, and the maximum interincisal opening before operation was bigger in the non-adhesion group than in the adhesion group.
The remaining 3 receptors (ci0100137028, ci0100140016 and ci0100150579) are orthologous to the LEC subfamily of human Adhesion group I.
Similar(52)
Three of the Adhesion groups have both mammalian and amphioxus members.
The remaining sponge Adhesions are most likely sponge specific, since they clustered separately from any known Adhesion groups.
Thus, var gene recombination hierarchies may promote the evolution of PfEMP1 adhesion groups with different patterns of sequestration and disease.
This group assignment of the Adhesion GPCRs is Ciona specific and is independent of the human Adhesion groups referred to by Bjarnadottir et.al., 2004 [ 29]. 16 Ciona Adhesion receptors could be included into these five groups reflecting a probable paralogous relationship between the groups.
Finally, data of 96 women [no adhesion barrier group, N = 49 (university hospital 27 patients; private hospital or private medical center 22 patients); autocross-linked polysaccharide group, N = 47 [university hospital 20 patients; private hospital or private medical center 27 patients)] were analyzed (Supplementary data, Fig. S2).
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