Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(13)
Histological scoring was performed by two different pathologists in a blinded manner.
Immunostaining was evaluated by two different pathologists (EC and FL-R), using criteria based on published cut-offs, as follows.
The liver sections were coded and independently examined in a blinded manner by two different pathologists.
Tumour microvessels were counted separately by two different pathologists following the international consensus guidelines on angiogenesis quantification (Vermeulen et al, 1996), with low interobserver variability.
Each patient's microvessel count was the average of two separate counts by two different pathologists (SN and JW) who remained blind to patient outcome.
Based on the inflammatory response, mineralization, necrosis and fibroplasia evaluated, the histopathological lesions were scored in 3 levels of severity (mild, moderate, and severe) by two different pathologists.
Similar(47)
Rate of histological complete response after double reading by two different pathologist.
The staining intensity was scored using a four step scale (0, 1+, 2+, or 3+) and the percentage of positive cells was estimated by three different pathologists (0 = none, 1 = <1%, 2 = 1 10%, 3 = 10 30%, 4 = 30 70%, 5 = >70% of tumor cells).
Each slide was independently examined by three different pathologists.
The degree of inflammation in five specimens was evaluated by three different pathologists.
If dysplasia was found, the microsections were evaluated by three different pathologists.
More suggestions(17)
by two distinct pathologists
by two different doctors
by two different personnel
by two different downturns
by two different applications
by two different factors
by two independent pathologists
by two different friends
by two different lobbies
by two different species
by two different audiences
by two different drivers
by two different women
by two different routes
by two different operators
by two different paths
by two different couples
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