Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(2)
Each of these categories was reviewed with leaders in their respective field at the University of Michigan to ensure validity of the searches.
The number of providers seen in order to achieve the illness outcomes they had by the different categories was reviewed and is shown if Figure 4.
Similar(58)
During this process, the categories were reviewed by three judges to assess their suitability and mutual thematic exclusion.
These categories were reviewed by another researcher and considered exhaustive, exclusive, and sensitising [ 20].
Major theme categories were reviewed numerous times by two social scientists (JRM and GM) to ensure that classification was adequate.
Consensus of codes was achieved through meetings between team members whereby emerging codes, concepts and categories were reviewed and discussed.
The categories were reviewed to make sure that no categories were describing the same phenomena, and subsequently organised into core themes.
Upon completion of data entry, all categories were reviewed and reclassified if necessary to ensure consistency in coding and that there was no duplication.
All responses and categories were reviewed by 2 faculty members for agreements, discussions ensued to determine the best, agreed-upon categorization when disagreement existed.
All responses and categories were reviewed by a different faculty member for agreement; discussions ensued to determine the best, agreed-upon categorization when disagreement existed.
Two authors initially independently classified 50 different publications each, and the above categories were reviewed for relevance and revised as necessary.
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