Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(4)
The midpoint of the expansive and restrictive estimates was used as our estimate of the total number of treatment entrants.
The midpoint between the expansive and restrictive estimates was considered our best estimate of the total opioid user population.
Finally, even the most restrictive estimates indicate that meaningful numbers of heterozygous SNPs described by Sanger must exist.
To account for potential double-counting of individuals receiving buprenorphine who may have also attended a drug treatment program, we calculated both expansive and restrictive estimates of the number of treatment entrants.
Similar(55)
Using only the native range is the most restrictive estimate, but likely ignores the boundaries of the climate niche, which could only be elucidated by using the introduced range.
The restrictive estimate, which assumed that all opioid users were represented in the general population estimate, lowered the estimation to 69,463.
Therefore, the more expansive estimate assumed that individuals initiating buprenorphine treatment and those entering detoxification or drug treatment services were distinct, whereas the more restrictive estimate assumed that buprenorphine recipients were already counted among the drug treatment admissions.
The restrictive estimate assumed that the general population estimate accurately identifies all opioid users, thus eliminating the need to additionally include those individuals presenting for medical and drug services.
The most restrictive estimate assumed that individuals identified through corrections or overdose deaths were already accounted for by the NSDUH sampling strategy and estimation method, even though corrections populations are not surveyed directly.
Compared with the OLS model, the fixed effects model is less restrictive because estimates are not confounded by time-constant unobserved variables.
If the structure imposed on the latter then is too restrictive, problematic estimates for the former may result; see [ 56] for a cautionary example.
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