Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(1)
Overall, the majority of reviews had extensive flaws, and only 31010%) had minimal flaws.
Similar(59)
The review was considered to have extensive flaws if it received a score of 1, major flaws if it received a score of 3, minor flaws if it received a score of 5, and minimal flaws if it received a score of 7[ 14].
In a sense, we have used a "sledgehammer to crack a nut" by detailing numerous lines of evidence to refute narrowly constructed research that obviously had extensive methodological and analytical flaws.
Minorca has extensive plains.
England and Ireland have extensive karst areas.
Louisiana has extensive oyster beds.
Companies have extensive recruiting procedures.
A total of 43 (30.9%) reports had minimal or minor flaws as shown by an overall score of ≥ 5, and 96 (69.1%) reports had major or extensive flaws, scoring ≤ 4 on the overall quality summary score.
Based on these nine criteria, the reviewer must give a rating score on a grading scale from one, reflecting extensive flaws, to seven, reflecting minimal flaws.
Scores on this instrument can vary from 1 (extensive flaws) to 7 (minimal flaws).
The overall scores on this checklist range from "extensive flaws" (score 1 or 2), to "major flaws" (score 3 or 4), "minor flaws" (score 5 or 6) and "minimal flaws" (score 7).
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