Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(6)
Scoring was performed on decoded slides by two separate observers, using the following parameters.
Staining was assessed by two separate observers for each case (DS and JGK), one of whom is a pathologist.
Behaviour was independently scored by two separate observers, one of whom was blind to the lesion group assignment of each animal.
For both VEGF and TS determinations, each section was scored by two separate observers (FDP, AMG) at light-microscope (200× and 400×) and, in cases when the difference exceeded 10%, by a third observer.
T2-weighted and ZOOM-DWI images were assessed in combination for the presence of tumour by two separate observers (observer 1: 19 years experience of endovaginal MR imaging, observer 2: 2 years experience) without access to the details of previous histopathology.
The expression level of wolframin-stained cells per field (250x) at light microscopy was calculated and compared in different specimens by two separate observers (A.B. and F.B). in a double blind fashion and described as absent, very low, low, moderate, high, and very high.
Similar(54)
These experiments were repeated at least three times, with two separate observers performed counting blind.
During each 15-min observation period, three separate observers each observed approximately 10 tagged racemes.
The effects of mPGES-1 genetic deletion on inflammation were graded on a scale of 0 to 3 by three separate blinded observers: 0 signifies no inflammatory cells, 1 signifies few inflammatory cells, 2 signifies moderate inflammatory cells, and 3 signifies extensive inflammatory cells.
A subset of the breast measurements obtained by two separate readers (reader 1: SH and reader 2: NFB) were used to assess the inter-observer reliability.
When given the choice to pick between a container favored by three separate chimps (graphic) and one frequented by only a single chimp, seven out of the nine observers tended to go with the popular crowd.
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