Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(2)
Exact(8)
Following the initial search, documents were assessed to identify those containing information about the topic areas for this assessment.
Thirty-one full documents were assessed and nine studies met inclusion criteria.
After rounds of physical challenges (ten instances of handling each), the documents were assessed for changes to their physical state, i.e. deterioration.
Documents were assessed based on four criteria developed by Scott [ 15].
All documents were assessed for the level of evidence they provided.
After the pilot phase, all documents were assessed by one researcher and then independently by a second researcher.
Similar(52)
The performance of our system on our manually annotated corpus of 40 documents is assessed and the results are summarized in Tables 7 and 8. OMM system results are provided in an additional file [see Additional file 3].
Clearly, our experiments retrieving Tier 2 from the Tier 1 result set do not completely match the manual process of reviewing, in which full-text documents are assessed against the inclusion and exclusion criterion and PICO specifications (our ranking algorithms continue to use only citations - abstract plus metadata - for each tier).
In the case of documents for which no particular value is elicited, obviously missing text in a document leads to that document being assessed as unfit for use.
'Indication Documented' was assessed in 3031 patients.
Compliance with 'Indication Documented' was assessed in 5152 patients and overall the national mean was 97%.
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