Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(6)
Both groups' results are a good indication that "clean" can indeed be redefined.
The odds ratio (=0.989) approaches equality for both groups (results are very close to the neutral line).
For both groups, results were similar (Table 2).
When comparing both groups, results showed significantly higher increases in hand-grip scores and body weights were seen in the fish oil/celecoxib group (Table 2).
It could be argued that because of the open label and flexible design, with individual changes in AEDs possible in both groups, results may have been affected by the patient's or physician's expectations or decisions.
Both groups' results showed a very high correlation: r = .96, p < .01 (2- tailed), with no significant difference found in the Npar Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test between the groups: z = -.679, p < .25 (1-tailed).
Similar(54)
Chronic administration of fluoxetine in both chronically-isolated and control animals resulted in more or less normal hepatic architecture, while clozapine in both groups resulted in liver injury.
The different DTI scanning parameters (higher number of diffusion directions and better spatial resolution for Group 2) for both groups resulted in Group 2 showing higher Sigma values for the sweep range than Group 1 for comparable sparsity values.
It is also unlikely that the frequent active follow-up and aggressive treatment of malaria pursued as part of the study design prevented the detection of VE, because majority of the proportions of endpoint cases in both groups resulted from passive case detection alone (77% and 72% in FMP1/AS02 and Rabipur® recipients, respectively).
Since non-CGI-associated CGs show higher methylation levels than CGI-associated CGs (Figure 5A), we further analyzed if the differential methylation of both groups resulted in the observed difference in demethylation efficiency between CGI- and non-CGI-associated CGs (Figure 5B, C).
Triglyceride levels increased in both groups, resulting in no significant between-group difference.
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