Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(13)
In a primary screen of 461 deficiencies collectively uncovering ∼50% of the Drosophila genome, we identified twelve intervals harboring Rho1-interacting genes.
A primary screen of 21,121 siRNA pools targeting most genes in the human genome identified 336 (1.6%) siRNAs that caused a significant increase in monopolar mitotic arrest in 60 nM K5I.
Our search results underwent a primary screen of titles and abstracts to identify any recent study that addressed breast cancer risk in relation to lactation history or more broadly, 'reproductive factors.' Any study identified in the primary screen as potentially eligible for inclusion then was assessed in a full-text screen according to predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria.
The primary screen of 752 whole genome amplified tumor DNA samples yielded 24 samples (∼4%) with a variant profile, distinct from that seen in association with the FOXL2 c.402C>G mutation-positive A-GCT specimens, as well as 41 with an indeterminate profile and 29 samples that failed.
Therefore a primary screen of these codons would be attractive.
We carried out an initial qRT-PCR screen (referred to as the primary screen) of 1,482 transcription-factor genes (Additional file 1).
Similar(47)
Conclusion: The CPP questionnaire can be considered as a validated tool for primary screening of CPP.
Overall, our data suggest that evaluation of circulating miRNA is suitable for primary screening of ovarian cancer.
Finally, we varied the cost of sequencing in our scenario analysis evaluating primary screening of generally healthy individuals with NGS.
Our study provides a powerful tool for the primary screening of large numbers of food samples for yeast contamination.
Assuming next-generation sequencing costs $500, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for primary screening of healthy individuals was $133,400 <$100,000/quality-adjustedd life-year gained in 10% of simulations).
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