Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(3)
The difference in change scores between groups (MBSR: -6.9 cm vs. wait-list: -0.2 cm; sum score of 3 10 cm-VAS) was deemed clinically important.
11 15 included lesions >6 cm (sum of diameters), intended doxorubicin dosage of 100 mg, and repeat embolization performed in 7 8 weeks; patients no.
The first six patients had lesions ≤6 cm (sum of diameters) with a targeted dose of 50 mg of doxorubicin and repeat embolization performed in 7 8 weeks; patients no.
Similar(57)
To calculate EAGB per unit area of a census, the EAGB values per tree with a DBH greater than or equal to 60 cm were summed and then divided by the productive area of the NFMP's forest stand.
To calculate EAGB per unit area of an inventory, the EAGB values per tree with a DBH greater than or equal to 30 cm were summed across each plot and then divided by 0.3 ha (area of the plot).
To calculate EAGB per unit area of a census, the EAGB values per tree with a DBH greater than or equal to 60 cm were summed and then divided by the productive area of the NFMP's forest stand.
To calculate EAGB per unit area of an inventory, the EAGB values per tree with a DBH greater than or equal to 30 cm were summed across each plot and then divided by 0.3 ha (area of the plot).
Cross-sectional areas (cm) of the sum of all of these muscles were computed and the mean value for two consecutive images was computed for each patient.
The risk of developing CNS metastases increased by 4% per cm increase in the total sum of the longest diameters of target lesions (HR = 1.004; 95% CI 1.001 1.006; P = 0.0066).
For example the proportion of ROH >4 Mb in length was correlated (r = 0.9993, p<0.0001) with the proportion of ROH identified using a 5 cM threshold, while the sum of ROH >0.5 Mb was also perfectly correlated (r = 0.9999, p<0.0001) with the sum of ROH called using a 0.04 cM threshold.
That is, for a specific capacity target cm, p and the sum of its components are expressed as a two-variable function of γ 1 tgt and γ 2 tgt.
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