Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(4)
Exact(21)
Q: The RDoC project aims to incorporate genetics, imaging, cognitive science, and other quantifiable information to underpin a new psychiatric disease classification system.
The APACHE II score is a popular and well tested score based severity of disease classification system (SoDCS), described in [32] by Knaus et al., which uses a simple set of 12 physiological variables for prediction.
Past medical conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and cerebrovascular accidents, and clinical severities such as APACHE (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) II score, SAPS (severity of disease classification system), and SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) scores were not significant changes between the ischemic and non-ischemic groups.
We speculate that the main reason behind APACHE II not being a good predictor in severe sepsis could be due to APACHE II is a general purpose severity of disease classification system while LBP serum levels might have a more specific association with severe sepsis.
The DPC, as developed in Japan, provides a diagnosis-dominant disease classification system.
We chose the MeSH disease classification system to classify the diseases in our dataset.
Similar(39)
Different standard disease classification systems exist but their suitability for cross-cultural comparisons of ethnomedical data has never been assessed.
This is largely because there are different disease classification systems for TKM and Western medicine.
Response: Considering that traditional disease classification systems are descriptive conceptual systems, we designed that following analyses to make the comparison.
The contradictory observations between our disease network and the traditional disease classification systems may provide insightful clues.
On the other hand, the inaccurate diagnosis descriptions, caused some diseases to occur in various disease classification systems or in the category 'NEC'NEC
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