Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(16)
No differences between groups were seen as regards CGRP and SP protein expression in the TNC.
Whereas, no differences between groups were seen as regards CGRP and SP protein expression at NTC level.
Statistically significant differences (p<0.05) between groups were seen with the following metabolites: uric acid, hypoxanthine and glutamic acid were higher in plasma from cases, while L-tryptophan and adenosine-5'-diphosphate (ADP) were lower; uric acid and L-histidine were lower in urine from cases.
No statistical differences in the measured parameters between groups were seen (Table 2).
The largest differences in healing rates between groups were seen at the nine-month follow-up.
No baseline differences between groups were seen in relation to HAD-A scores.
Similar(44)
A great variability of lifetime within and between groups was seen.
A statistically significant difference between groups was seen only for separation (p = 0.028); p values of displacement and opening angle were 0.354 and 0.099, respectively.
MicroCT analysis (2D and 3D) correlated well with the histological measurements, although more variability and less discrimination between groups was seen, with no statistically significant differences with alendronate treatment.
No statistically significant difference between groups was seen for the remainder of the analysis.
However, in the present study no significant difference between groups was seen.
More suggestions(17)
between groups were calculated
between groups were investigated
between groups were found
between groups were analysed
between groups were detected
between genotypes were seen
between groups were made
between groups were examined
between groups were accepted
between isolates were seen
between groups were done
between sexes were seen
between groups were determined
between tissues were seen
between groups were analyzed
between models were seen
between sites were seen
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