Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(1)
This measurement method compared favorably with others in a European study (Mennen et al. 1996).
Similar(59)
This paper presents a targeted study investigating how the axial strains obtained from these two measurement methods compared.
The measurement methods compared clearly differ in the nature of information delivered: different dimensions of exposure, posture captured via continuous or categorical variables, different breadth and depth of exposure information, and different origin of information (worker vs researcher vs electronic equipment).
The results of this measurement method are compared to the results of the two-load method for a linear time-invariant source.
The precise measurements of the current method compared to previous designed systems are not affected by sunlight, and due to the method of flow measurement, remain accurate even for low infiltration values.
However, in a recent laboratory investigation in porcine models of acute lung injury, both the existing indicator-dilution methods of EVLW volume measurement and our prototype Li-thermal method compared poorly with postmortem gravimetric measurements [ 8].
However, these variables (EC, ADPMS, ADPLC) were secondary outcome measures used to validate our measurement method by comparing it to existing data.
As previously established in other studies, the absolute magnitudes of normalized signals reflects the broader dynamic range of the qPCR method compared to microarray measurements [ 53, 64].
Therefore, 4D-AutLVQ™ is the more practicable measurement method when comparing the different analyzing programs.
Until now there is no standardized measurement method to compare different muscle layers in the abdominal wall, mainly because there are no clearly defined biomarkers for the location and orientation of the transducer.
A reliability analysis has been performed to evaluate the consistency and measurement error of this smartphone-aided Cobb angle measurement method and compare its reliable characteristics with those of the manual method, demonstrating thatboth the intraobserver ICC and the interobserver ICC were better in the smartphone set than in the manual set [ 12].
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