Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(4)
Exact(2)
More providers reported they had ORS in stock than zinc.
Seventy-one per cent reported routinely counselling (usually or always) women on FCs; more providers reported FC counselling for HIV-positive (82%) and unmarried women (74%), and fewer reported counselling for married women (66%), women using hormonal contraception (65%), and female adolescents (55%).
Similar(58)
More voucher providers reported clients counselled on the importance of breastfeeding, but more non-voucher providers said they counselled women on family planning, which is unexpected due to the fact another voucher for family planning is available for poor women.
There were few differences between providers' reports of what maternal danger signs they advise postnatal women of, apart from significantly more voucher facility providers reported counselling on signs of severe pre-eclampsia (44.2 % versus 26.0: p = 0.017) in the immediate postnatal period (first 2 to 3 days after birth).
A few providers reported providing more than one service per client but in different rooms.
In provider-level integrated facilities, providers reported providing more than one service to a client in the same room.
Shaanxi (Table 6) and Ningxia providers reported more affected children than providers from other provinces.
Those who had used independent providers reported more positive experiences than those who had used the NHS [ 29].
More than half of all providers reported less than 10 years of general healthcare experience and approximately 70% had less than 10 years of Family Planning experience.
The regression model for the outcome of reported routine ORS prescribing was invalid among ASHAs and AWWs because more than 99% of these providers reported routinely recommending ORS.
Although providers reported ordering more testing during the campaign period, it is not possible to determine if this increased utilization resulted from consumer demand, industry pressures, or more at-risk consumers presenting for testing.
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