Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(2)
Exact(1)
Mutation detection frequencies (deleterious and splice-site mutations and large intragenic rearrangements) in relation to the inclusion criteria were highest in the group of patients diagnosed with both breast and ovarian cancers (73.7%) and in familial cases with clustering of breast and ovarian cancers in first and second degree relatives (60%).
Similar(59)
Significant differences between DPPSCs and DPMSCs were observed for the expression of bone markers, calcium deposition and ALP activity during osteogenic differentiation; these criteria were higher for DPPSCs than DPMSCs.
Exclusion criteria were: high level of suspicion of active TB or diagnostic work up for TB in progress.
The most prevalent criteria were high blood pressure (47.5%) and increased waist circumference (39.1%).
Platelet response rates according to 2006 International Working Group criteria were higher for the group that received romiplostim (odds ratio, 15.6).
The exclusion criteria were: high-risk pregnancy, pre-eclampsia, dystocia, autoimmune diseases, tumors, or current use of oral steroids, although asthma was not an exclusion criterion.
Exclusion criteria were high blood pressure, cardiac diseases, asthma, and pregnancy as the stress induction might have been disadvantageous for individuals showing any of these conditions.
Genetic correlations between criteria were high (greater than 0.90) except between ranks and earnings per place (0.58) or per start (0.67).
Similarly, the percentage of points in the Clarke error grid zone A points meeting ISO criteria were higher with FC (87.8% vs. 70.2%).
Exclusion criteria were high hip dislocations with a femoral shortening osteotomy and patients with an indication for hip arthroplasty due to metastatic involvement.
The main selection criteria were high estimated breeding values for human-directed aggression and as little interrelationship among the cases as possible.
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