Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(2)
Exact(2)
The article was judged defamatory.
My article was judged to be of eighth-grade quality.
Similar(58)
Since several items required in quality reviews [46, 47] were not applicable to this study, the quality of the articles was judged as low, medium, or high as proposed by Petrén et al [48].
An author's "quality" is determined both by how well their articles are judged, and by how good they are at rating articles written by other contributors.
Thirty articles were judged to be potentially relevant.
Full text versions of all selected potentially relevant articles were judged (H.K).
Only two community-chosen terms associated to two articles were judged to be too specific by curators.
After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria to 2,032 identified titles and abstracts, 47 articles were judged to be relevant and were critically reviewed.
After a second round of double screening, 12 articles were judged to be eligible for inclusion in the review (Additional file 2).
One of the great challenges for an editorial board, and particularly for an editor-in-chief, is to establish the benchmarks by which articles are judged.
Although quality ratings were not possible for qualitative articles, the identified limitations of the included articles identified meant that none of the quantitative articles were judged as methodologically moderate or strong.
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