Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(8)
This review article provides an overview of the 4 phase III studies that have compared these NOACs, examining major outcomes of efficacy and safety.
Outcomes of efficacy, tolerability and harm, and switching to the opposite state/pole were extracted, using dichotomous data wherever possible.
Long-term outcomes of efficacy and 'late effects' are also of major importance, and health economic considerations should be central to the development of therapeutic strategies.
In the past, PA intervention and behaviour change research has focused on the evaluation and outcomes of efficacy, in which efficacy of intervention is defined as its effect under 'ideal conditions'.
Furthermore none of the trials demonstrated any benefit from CIC over BUD or FP for indirect outcomes of efficacy i.e. lung function, improving response to AMP or metacholine as provoking agents or for decreasing markers of inflammation.
Before we analyzed the outcomes of efficacy and safety, we compared the duration of symptoms, refractive error, axial length and preoperative BCVA between the two groups and found no significant difference.
Similar(52)
Preclinical and early phase clinical microbicide studies have not consistently predicted the outcome of efficacy trials.
The secondary outcome of efficacy will be defined as 'response', which is similar to the acute phase treatment measurement.
The primary outcome of efficacy will be the mean overall change of the total score in continuous depression severity scales from baseline to end point.
The primary outcome of efficacy was the four category-variable: C1 = ACPR, C2 = LPF, C3 = LCF, and C4 = ETF, the first category being the best category and the last category being the worst, in terms of health condition.
The primary outcome of efficacy in the long term will be defined as the mean overall change in continuous depression severity scales, which is similar to the acute phase treatment measurement.
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