Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(5)
Indicator analyses were conducted across the landscape, using two well-established methods (IndVal and SIMPER).
Significance level for MRPP and the Dufrêne & Legendre indicator analyses were set at α = 0.05.
All indicator analyses were performed in R using the "duleg" function from the labdsv package [66].
Community-scale multivariate analyses including non-metric multidimensional scaling (nMDS), multiresponse permutation procedure (MRPP), and the Dufrêne & Legendre indicator analyses were performed in R [36] using statistical packages vegan [37], ecodist [38], BiodiversityR [39], and labdsv [40].
All biochemical indicator analyses were carried out on serum blood samples.
Similar(55)
In univariate analysis, none of the biological indicators analysed were correlated with tumour recurrence using the log-rank test (P>0.1, respectively) (data not shown), except that muscle-invasive tumours tended to have a higher risk of local recurrence (P=0.06).
Indicator species analyses were performed where partial Mantel tests indicated significant differences in frequency and per cent cover between the vegetation in thistle versus non-thistle plots (Table 3).
For the indicator specialist assessment analyses were divided according to gender.
Because the latter definition used indicator variables, the analyses were performed on a subset of the cohort in which the resulting variables were mutually exclusive.
The key outcome indicators used for analyses were (1) CCU with commercial sex partners and (2) STI treatment-seeking from government health facilities.
All predisposing and enabling factors that showed a statistically significant association with maternal oral health indicators in bivariate analyses were included in the multivariable models.Tthe ORs for having CPI ≥1 were higher for women aged 21 30 yrs (OR = 1.8, 95% CI 1.2-2.8), and 31 45 yrs (OR = 3.7, 95% CI 2.1-6.6 2.1-6.6ed with their comparedarts belowith yrs.
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