Exact(36)
After excluding this study, heterogeneity still existed in pooled specificity (I 2 = 53.7 %) and pooled positive LR (I 2 = 60.7 %).
Excluding this study from the analysis did not materially affect the overall effect (average FMD response 2.4%, see post-hoc analyses), but reduced the association between the quality score and the FMD effect considerably (P-value = 0.030; R2 = 0.34).
Furthermore, excluding this study did not alter the results.
We performed a sensitivity analysis by excluding this study from our analysis.
Excluding this study did not change the results of any primary outcomes.
Excluding this study, the cumulative percentage of bilateral patients was 13.7%.
Similar(24)
In a sensitivity analysis that excluded this study, the heterogeneity disappeared (I = 0%, P = 0.88).
When we excluded this study, the pooled effect size for sleep latency was −0.54 (−0.91 to −0.15).
The effect of creep damage was excluded in this study.
Patients with known gastric carcinomas were excluded from this study.
Ampullary carcinoma, gallbladder carcinoma, and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma were excluded from this study.
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