Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(7)
No heterogeneity was found between the studies using high intensities (p = 0.56, I 2 = 0%).
The contrasting results between the studies using transplanted lungs [56, 57] and BAL/sputum [10, 60] in CF compared to throat microbiota might be explained by the status of the disease.
Furthermore, the review failed to investigate reasons for heterogeneity between the studies using subgroup analysis.
The study using the highest dose had significantly better outcomes than the others, but no difference was noted between the studies using lower doses (Analysis 25.4).
We evaluated heterogeneity between the studies using the Q test [ 15] and the I-squared statistic (I² = 100% x (Q-df)/Q) [ 16].
The VOT-derived StO2 variables as reported in the literature, however, varied widely between the studies using a 15 mm probe and the studies using a 25 mm probe [ 9- 14, 16, 16- 18].
Similar(53)
We believe that the difference in gender between the recipients in the studies using PLTP deficient mice is not a likely explanation for the conflicting results.
Although the results are consistent, key differences between the studies used in the meta-analysis include: presenting rhythm, method of cooling, time taken to reach target temperature and duration of hypothermia [ 81].
The subgroup analysis between the studies which used a direct immunoassay with the studies using RIA with extraction and chromatography revealed a significant difference.
To establish the relationship between the variables, the study used Karl Pearson's coefficient of correlation (see Table 3).
The study used a between-groups experimental design.
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