Suggestions(5)
Exact(9)
In summary, the method of item generation for the patient self-report measures was generally comprehensive, with most measures using appropriate methods to generate a pool of items that cover the domain of interest.
Performance on care measures was generally lower in ICH and SAH compared to IS/TIA, including guideline-recommended measures for deep venous thrombosis (DVT) prevention (for ICH) and smoking cessation (for SAH) (multivariable-adjusted p < 0.001 for all comparisons).
Reporting of outcome measures was generally good (n = 14 of 17 studies), respectively).
The variability in DPOAE measures was generally constant across frequencies and ears.
Maintenance of gully control measures was generally given little attention in all of the villages, although most people are of the opinion that these practices work very well.
The inspected organization's initial assessment of the degree of implementation and the effect of the implemented measures was generally vague and relied on qualitative judgments.
Similar(51)
Other self-report measures are generally disease specific rather than general measures.
We chose to use disease-specific measures for treatment satisfaction and QOL in the current study because such measures are generally considered more sensitive than generic measures to the predicted effects of clinical trial interventions [ 18].
Although we collected Short Form 12 data from this sample, generic health outcome measures are generally less responsive than condition-specific measures and are therefore not considered to be suitable reference standards [ 6, 22].
Quality-of-life measures are generally distinguished as being either broad and generic or disease-specific with researchers favoring the inherent sharper focus of disease-specific tools.
In general, the additional delay achieved by introducing non-pharmaceutical border control measures is generally small in comparison with the natural delay (Figure 5D).
More suggestions(2)
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