Your English writing platform
Free sign upSuggestions(3)
Exact(2)
Following the initial search strategy a further six full papers were identified from reference lists in the excluded full publications for inclusion in the review of evidence.
The criteria for inclusion in the review of epidemiological evidence were: Cross-sectional or longitudinal studies that included participants exposed to computer work (mouse or keyboard) or typing and participants without such exposure and case-referent studies where computer work (mouse or keyboard) or typing was specified as an exposure.
Similar(58)
Uncontrolled studies were eligible for inclusion in the review because of the anticipated lack of evidence from RCTs.
Of these, 13 were selected for inclusion in the review with a total of 262 patients.
We measured agreement between reviewers on the selection of articles for inclusion in the review.
Two reviewers then assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion in the review.
Duplicates were removed before final screening of articles for inclusion in the review.
SH repeated the selection of studies for inclusion in the review, data extraction and analysis.
Observational studies were not considered for inclusion as we expected to have reasonable number of RCTs for inclusion in the review.
32 This left eight studies with a total of 16 913 participants for inclusion in the review.
Each reviewer independently selected studies for inclusion in the review.
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