Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(2)
The evaluation of baseline genitourinary function was therefore inevitably subject to methodology limitations, i.e., the potential recall bias.
We emphasize that patients were included in this study only when their normal baseline genitourinary function was ensured.
Similar(58)
A total of 112 patients (tumor, node, metastasis system stage I, n = 8; stage II, n = 54; stage III, n = 50; male, n = 58; female, n = 54; age [mean ± standard deviation], 55.8 ± 6.4 years) with good baseline genitourinary function were operated on with the intent of total preservation of pelvic autonomic nerves and curative resection of sigmoid colon cancer.
In this study, the evaluation of postoperative genitourinary function was conducted at the standardized time points before and after the operation.
The genitourinary function was evaluated on the basis of validated questionnaires including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), and Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI).
Assessments of genitourinary function were collected at EDIC year 10.
Because genitourinary function is influenced by preoperative function and numerous other variables, including the emotional and physiological status of the patients, as well as other influences such as chemotherapy, each patient was used as his or her own control in evaluating the change of function before and after surgery.
We determined whether patient utilities were predicted by sociodemographic characteristics or baseline genitourinary function.
The exclusion criteria were: (1) emergency or urgent surgery; (2) evidence of tumor invasion to adjacent organs or distant metastasis; (3) previous major abdominal or pelvic surgery; (4) abnormal preoperative baseline genitourinary function on the basis of validated questionnaire-based interview.
The baseline cognitive function was measured before surgery and again about a year after surgery.
Baseline renal function was within normal range.
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