Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(3)
All tests were compared to culture, which was treated as the reference standard.
All tests were compared and ranked according to the three criteria – SNR index, sensitivity and specificity, using data from the integrated dataset as measured and after supervised and unsupervised imputation of missing values.
When the usual cut-off value of the tests was not considered and all tests were compared using a ROC analysis, the STOP-BANG score and the ANC showed a similar performance, with a ROC area of 0.652 [SE 0.085] and 0.655 [SE 0.083], respectively, whereas Berlin's Questionnaire was less accurate with a ROC area of 0.538 [SE 0.093].
Similar(57)
When means of detection rates across all tests are compared between the two scenarios, there is no significant difference (P < 0.70, paired Student's t-test).
When patients positive in all the tests were compared with patients who had at least one negative test, only a plasma HIV RNA level <200 cp/ml was significantly associated with a false-negative result (p = 0.009).
The results obtained from all the three tests were compared with the specifications given in UNI 11040 (2003).
All hypothesis tests were compared with a two-sided alternative, whenever deemed appropriate.
Finally, all the neuropsychological tests were compared between the patients with positive course of their clinical status at 1 year of follow-up and those with negative course.
The SVC from the two tests had to be within 10% of each other before the training phase commenced, and this was considered a baseline measurement to which all subsequent SVC tests were compared.
All results from the non-parametric tests were compared to one-way ANOVA (PROC GLM, SAS), and in all cases the results were similar in terms of levels of significance.
The results for two tests were compared for all samples to determine relationship between results of different tests.
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