Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(11)
The agreement between both techniques was assessed using the Bland and Altmann method for repeated measurements.
Indeed, a significant correlation between both techniques was demonstrated (r = 0.43, P = 0.01, Pearson correlation) and we observed more LMNB1 mRNA in blood cells from VD+ than in those from VD− patients (n = 16 in each group): 0.31±0.14 vs. 0.21±0.09 (mean ± standard deviation, P = 0.01, Mann-Whitney Rank Sum Test).
The concordance between both techniques was 95.1%.
However, the discrepancy between both techniques was significant by habitat and locality, except in Serrano.
Relation between both techniques was analysed by the Spearman correlation coefficient Rs and linear regression.
The average percent error between both techniques was 2% over the physiological range of 35%-100% oxygenation.
Similar(49)
The corrosion behaviour of the deposits was analyzed by salt-spray and electrochemical methods and a good correlation between the results obtained with both techniques was observed.
The LVEF values obtained after pharmacological stress in rats closely matched between the cMRI and micro-PET values, whereas at rest, a larger variation between LVEF values obtained by both techniques was observed.
The only difference between both techniques is the input frames.
For the dorsal slice the differences between both techniques were not statistically different.
A number of discrepancies between both techniques were observed for the grouping of some Lactobacillus species.
More suggestions(17)
between both methodologies was
between both technologies was
between both factors was
between both spheres was
between both reviewers was
between both methods was
between both values was
between both areas was
between both tests was
between both results was
between both eyes was
between both genomes was
between both leaders was
between both countries was
between both parameters was
between both structures was
between both centres was
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