Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(2)
Exact(1)
One-way ANOVA was used for testing differences between genotypes for continuous variables and χ tests were used for testing differences between genotypes for dichotomous variables.
Similar(59)
The Wilcoxon rank sum test and 95% confidence interval for differences between median values were used to compare TPMT activities between subpopulations and the Mann–Whitney Rank Sum Test was used to compare clinical and laboratory findings with the two genotypes for continuous variables or parameters.
* Comparisons between the three genotype-groups for continuous variables by ANOVA test and for categorical variables by χtest IQR= interquartile ranges Glu/Glu= Glutamic acid/Glutamic acid Glu/Asp = Glutamic/Aspartate Asp/Asp = Aspartate/Aspartate BMI = body mass index *; ORs adjusted by maternal age, ethnic background and smoking status.
Comparison of genotypes and alleles between different groups for continuous dependent variables was accomplished by analysis of variance (ANOVA) or Student's t-test as appropriate.
Although the distance between genotypes is certainly not continuous, additional efforts to discretize the Euclidean distance may not be needed.
At that moment, a perfect association between the genotypes for that specific SNP and the phenotype has been created.
Quantitative differences between genotypes were found for 106 spots containing 64 unique proteins.
Everio high-definition models automatically switch between two internal media for continuous, uninterrupted recordings.
No differences between genotypes were found for any behavior.
Tumour characteristics were compared between different genotypes using Student's t-test for continuous variables (age and tumour size) and χ-test for categorical variables.
We then examined differences in cardiac phenotype by genotype using generalized linear models for continuous measures and logistic regression for dichotomous measures of cardiac function.
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