Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(38)
Statistical significance between groups was evaluated based on one-sided Wilcoxon test, * represent p-value < 0.05,*** represent p-value < 0.001, n = number of H3K9me3 domains between groups.
Then, long-term survival between groups was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier (KM) method with comparisons based on the log-rank test.
Comparison of response frequencies between groups was evaluated with Chi-square, Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney U tests as appropriate.
When required, significance of differences between groups was evaluated using Student's paired t test.
The significance of the difference between groups was evaluated with Student's t-test.
Comparison of mean values between groups was evaluated by an ANOVA followed by a post-hoc Student-Newman-Keuls test.
Similar(22)
Differences between groups were evaluated by log-rank statistics.
Differences in responses between groups were evaluated using analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Differences between groups were evaluated using parametric or non-parametric test as appropriate (χ2 or Fisher's test for categorical variables, and analysis of variance or Mann–Whitney U-test).
For the statistical analysis of the neural growth cone results, the differences between groups were evaluated using the Kruskal-Wallis test (non-parametric) followed by Dunn's multiple comparison test, as the data were not normally distributed.
Categorical variable differences between groups were evaluated using separate Pearson chi-squared tests.
More suggestions(16)
between groups was analyzed
between groups was estimated
between groups was done
between readers was evaluated
between genes was evaluated
between subgroups was evaluated
between operators was evaluated
between groups was set
between groups was conducted
between groups was compared
between means was evaluated
between reviewers was evaluated
between groups was made
between temporins was evaluated
between groups was related
between baskets was evaluated
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