Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(12)
We have evaluated the pitfalls in reporting sample size calculation in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the 10 highest impact factor anaesthesia journals.
†For trials reporting sample size calculations using binary outcome measures.
‡For trials reporting sample size calculations using continuous outcome measures.
66% of the studies reporting sample sizes, reported having <100 newcomers and nearly 34% reported having >100 newcomers.
Table 4 reports a pooled prevalence estimate for diabetes-related foot wounds based on six included studies reporting sample sizes ranging from 624 to 5188 and study quality scores from 4 to 6.
In addition, the proportion reporting sample size calculation in Chinese pediatric RCTs was also lower than in international pediatric RCTs (4 65%) [ 11, 28] and adult RCTs (23 64%) [ 28- 30].
Similar(48)
The reported sample median was the median of these values.
Zero of the 100 studies (0%) reported sample size calculations.
The sequence from a Moroccan Jew and a previously reported sample of unclarified ancestry form the closest branch coalescing with the Ashkenazi samples ~4,007 ybp.
96 % of studies reported sample size calculations.
The reported sample sizes differ from the original (n = 44,634) due to sample weighting and lagging.
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