Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(3)
Student's t-test was used to compare results between groups with normal distribution.
We compared the serum biomarkers between groups with normal and low BMD and assessed the correlations between the levels of bone turnover markers and the lipid profile and hsCRP level.
Comparisons between groups with normal and reduced insulin sensitivity within each autoimmunity category were conducted using t tests or nonparametric methods (as appropriate) for continuous variable and χ tests for categorical variables.
Similar(57)
One-way analysis of variance was performed for parametric variables between groups with a normal distribution.
Interestingly, our study showed no significant difference in the amount of bacteria between groups with a normal esophagus, reflux esophagitis, or Barrett's esophagus (p > 0.1).
Comparisons between groups with non-normal distributions were by two-sample t-tests or Mann–Whitney U tests after applying the one-sample Kolmogorov Smirnov test.
Then we performed univariate analysis of risk factors between the groups with normal creatinine clearance (group 1 and 2) and decreased creatinine clearance (group 3 and 4), respectively.
The statistical analysis between the groups with normal distributions was performed using Student's t test for 2 groups or ANOVA for multiple comparisons.
Statistically significant differences of data between analyzed groups with normal distribution were evaluated by the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to examine survival between groups with prolonged vs. normal QTc intervals; survival estimates were compared using a log-rank test.
For these groups of patients, we carried out independent samples t-tests to compare the mean immunoreactivity levels between groups (patients with normal vs. those with primary tumor; patients with primary tumor vs. those with metastatic tumor).
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