Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(8)
In both studies there is a factor related to the management of the improvement implementation as a project.
For both studies, there is clearly a worse outcome for those patients with metastases at diagnosis.
Although spatial heterogeneity was crucial for the diversification in both studies, there is an important difference between the two.
Even so, given the small sample sizes in both studies, there is insufficient data to make a conclusive determination about the efficacy of SSRIs.
However, for both studies, there is an apparent decrease in the cumulative hazard rate at around 2 years and a further small decrease at around 5 years.
However, given the importance of the timescale and the relatively low node supports in both studies, there is no definitive argument that may favor either scenario.
Similar(52)
In both studies there was no effect (P>0.05) of treatment on OM intakes.
The population studied was: 107 patients (with HAART) and 152 patients (no HAART) and in both studies there were a higher frequency in young white males.
In both studies there are two lesions (arrows) considered BIRADS III under follow-up.
Also, in both studies there are factors that relate to the dissemination of the obtained results and the advertisement of the improvement project to the people involved.
However, in both studies, there was an improvement in the American Fertility Society (AFS) scores compared to the no-treatment controls and the European pilot study demonstrated a significant reduction in adnexal adhesions [48].
More suggestions(15)
both parties there is
both publications there is
both methods there is
both peptides there is
both predictions there is
both meals there is
both counts there is
both sexes there is
both cases there is
both applications there is
both countries there is
both places there is
both groups there is
both leaders there is
both simulators there is
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