Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(2)
Exact(1)
Concordance and discordance between methods were evaluated by pairwise comparison of CNs (Table 1).
Similar(59)
Differences between calculation methods were evaluated by one-way ANOVA with repeated measures and Bonferroni post hoc analyses.
For samples with SAA concentrations within the assay range of EVA1 (10-270 mg/L), differences between the methods were evaluated in a difference plot.
Finally, the data were analyzed using analysis of variance, and differences between our previous and our optimized methods were evaluated using Fisher's PLSD. Figure 1 presented an overview of the second step of AMS target preparation.
Two immersion methods were evaluated.
Two different contracting methods were evaluated.
Four different motion correction methods were evaluated.
Agreement between diagnostic methods was evaluated by the Kappa test using GraphPad Quick Calcs software.
Agreement between sampling methods was evaluated by the following statistical tests: 'Kappa', 'The adjusted rand', McNemar's test for marginal symmetry, Proportion of agreement P0, P+, P-, and Odds Ratio.
Agreement between observers and between three different methods was evaluated by two independent readers in a pilot study.
Agreement between the two methods was evaluated as bias and precision as described by Bland and Altman (1986).
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