Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(4)
Exact(1)
Assumptions relating to heterogeneity and consistency were assessed using methods described by Song et al. 19 Differences in follow-up periods between studies were addressed in the analysis of the proportion of patients with improved vision, by fitting a binomial likelihood model with a complementary log-log link function which treated study length as an additional rate parameter.
Similar(59)
We did Bayesian network meta-analyses using a binomial likelihood model.
The former would also support the use of the binomial likelihood to model our data.
Fourth, we used a normal approximation to the likelihood, instead of the exact binomial likelihood, in the modeling for meta-analysis.
Following previous studies [ 47] we do not report log likelihood support values for our phenotype data as they may violate ClineFit's likelihood model assuming a genetic model with binomial variance.
The assumption of the conditional mean being equal to the conditional variance was investigated by comparing the log-likelihoods of the negative binomial regression model with the Poisson regression model.
Further, the likelihood ratio test comparing the corresponding negative binomial regression model with the Poisson model was marginally significant (P LRT = 0.052), therefore the negative binomial model was preferred.
The statistical analysis was based on binomial likelihoods with a logit link function.
The two-group comparison—each of which consists of n = 4 independent samples was performed using the gene-wise negative binomial generalized linear model with quasi-likelihood tests, implemented in EdgeR.
The two-groups comparison, each group consisting of n = 4 independent samples, was performed using the genewise negative binomial generalized linear model with quasi-likelihood tests (glmQLfit) implemented in EdgeR.
Bayesian geostatistical binomial and negative binomial models with zero inflation were fitted for sporozoite rates (SRs) and mosquito density, respectively.
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