Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(1)
The changes under conditioning stimuli compared to baseline tests were calculated as delta values: △value = value (stimuli) – value (baseline), which was used in results and figures as "relative changes".
Similar(59)
Baseline values for the neutrophil and monocyte count and function tests were calculated as the average of values between first and second baseline assessments.
Paired t-tests were calculated for baseline- and follow-up scores.
To examine change in the patients' heart failure symptoms and cardiovascular health, paired t-tests were calculated comparing baseline and follow-up values on the LHFQ, 6 minute walk test, ejection fraction, and QRS duration form electrocardiogram.
Within each group, paired comparison t-tests were calculated to test whether the changes from baseline to 3 months, from baseline to 24 weeks and from 12 to 24 weeks were statistically significant.
Pearson correlations between baseline cognitive test scores were calculated.
Unadjusted annualized incidence rates of hypoglycemia for groups of individuals divided by tertiles of baseline cognitive test score were calculated by dividing the number of individuals with events by the total number of person-years until the time of the first event or last contact.
Between group differences in baseline characteristics were calculated by independent-sample Students t-test, Chi square test or Mann–Whitney test as appropriate.
Percent change from baseline measurements were calculated.
The differences between test with conditioning stimuli and corresponding baseline were calculated as delta values: △value = value (conditioned) – value (baseline), which was used in figures (A visual and B auditory test) as "relative changes".
After performing Shapiro-Wilk's test to assess normality, group differences in all collected data at baseline were calculated with Mann–Whitney test, while data changes in MO group between T0 and T1 recording sessions were analyzed with Wilcoxon test.
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