Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(3)
Exact(1)
The means referred below to are means calculated in post-hoc tests, and correspond to the proportions of sample answering in the four categories presented in Table 88 (Mintervention = mean proportion in intervention group, Mcontrol = mean proportion in control group, Mpre = mean proportion at pre-test, Mfollow-up = mean proportion at follow-up).
Similar(59)
In contrast, in the alternative hypothesis, the mean proportion looking at either would be expected around 0.5.
Hence, in the null hypothesis, the mean proportion looking at either would be deviated from 0.5 (i.e. chance level) due to the unknown factor causing a preference to either of asymmetric arrangement of flashes.
Nevertheless, the low mean proportion of medications dispensed (at best, 33% at study end), suggests that intervention with pharmacotherapy was suboptimal.
The mean proportion of amber/green drinks at follow-up (51%) was significantly higher (p<0.05) than at baseline (29%).
In each family group naïve subjects were also present (mean number of naïve individuals/group = 6.16 individuals; range 1 13) and participated (90% of naïve individuals participated/ group; range 1 11; see Appendix Table A2 for the mean proportion of push attempts at the individual level).
These also did not differ significantly from DYT1 patients (burst index mean 3.64 at rest, and 3.17 with movement, mean proportion of spikes in burst 0.11 at rest and 0.07 with movement).
The mean proportion with MSD seeking care at SHCs for all strata and HUAS-lite surveys combined was 22.6%.
In the 2-AAF cohort (n = 9), the mean proportion of β-galactosidase positive cells at the time of hepatectomy was 4.5±1.36% (Figure 2) similar to the one observed in the retrorsine group at hepatectomy (p = 0.23 using Student's t test).
The mean proportion of mothers who were smoking at the time of delivery was 15% (range 3 33%).
At baseline, the mean proportion of amber/green drinks and foods per machine were 29%and1%1% respectively and no labelling was evident.
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