Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(20)
We estimated efficacy against human papillomavirus 31/33/45/52/58 from a meta-analysis of quadrivalent vaccine trials.
Vaccination is a possibility for the future; a recent trial of a conjugated capsular polysaccharide vaccine in renal dialysis patients estimated efficacy at ≈60% (18).
The true four week quit rate in those who receive cytisine was assumed to be 55%, which is midway between the estimated efficacy of varenicline (60%) [ 8] and NRT [ 6].
This is due to a combination of factors: (i) we used a lower total cost per vaccinee, (ii) we used higher QALY decrements in our study than in three of the four previous studies [ 8- 10], (iii) we used more realistic disease incidence data (including mortality rates) compared to all previous studies, and finally (iv) we estimated efficacy based on the most suitable data.
To compute this estimate we first computed the estimated efficacy of receiving screening among subjects who would receive screening if offered.
On the basis of the predefined estimated efficacy of trivalent GBS vaccine to protect infants born at >33 weeks' gestation, we estimated that, each year, 1,230 cases of invasive GBS disease and 163 deaths could be prevented in HIV-unexposed infants and 886 cases and 117 deaths could be prevented in HIV-exposed infants (Table 2).
Similar(39)
In the first approach, which stems from [Sommer, A., Zeger, S., 1991. On estimating efficacy in clinical trials.
Different endpoints can be used to estimate efficacy of a pre-erythrocytic vaccine: P. falciparum asexual-stage infection, clinical malaria, severe malaria or death.
13 Approaches to estimating efficacy without making this key assumption exist, and are becoming increasingly popular.
The framework is used to estimate efficacy parameters that are not directly measurable as trial outcomes.
This correlation is unlikely to be the case but reflects the unavoidable difficulty of estimating efficacy for H5N1 vaccines.
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