Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(1)
All questions were evaluated on a five-point scale.
Similar(59)
All submitted questions were evaluated independently and equally.
The questions were evaluated by two domain experts who found that all the questions were satisfactory for assessment regardless of some errors in the questions' syntax (75% of the MCQs were assessed as syntactically correct) (Papasalouros et al. 2017).
SF36, KSS, WOMAC and VAS plus 2 satisfaction questions were evaluated.
These questions were evaluated for test-retest reliability.
During the assessment process, the parameters randomization, blinding, dropouts, and supplementary questions were evaluated.
A total of 24 questions were evaluated by 169 participants in the Delphi panel round three.
The relationships between the IAQ Practice Index and selected questions were evaluated for questionnaires that were at least 80% complete.
The four survey questions were evaluated and quantified on a Likert scale (1 = strongly agree through 5 = strongly disagree).
The correlation between subscales, and global health and oral health questions were evaluated using Spearman's correlation test.
Then, the survey questions were evaluated based on these three criteria: (1) were there redundancies present; (2) did the question yield good information; and, (3) did opportunities exist to develop new avenues for analysis.
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