Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(25)
Two authors independently screened all retrieved citations by reviewing their titles and abstracts (RCFC and FTM).
To date we have examined over 4000 retrieved citations and identified 120 intervention studies and 24 qualitative studies for potential inclusion.
Retrieved citations were exported to Refworks (http://www.refworks.com).com
Retrieved citations were reviewed against the question-specific inclusion criteria by two independent reviewers.
Three reviewers (VM, AR, and GF) independently reviewed the titles and/or abstracts of retrieved citations.
Two authors (CEC, LFPS) independently selected potentially relevant studies by screening retrieved citations and abstracts.
Similar(35)
In the present study we retrieved citation counts for manuscripts accepted by ACP or rejected and published elsewhere for a fixed time window of three years after the publication year.
In order to identify pertinent studies, we scanned titles and abstracts from each retrieved citation.
To select potentially relevant papers, the retrieved citation titles were scanned, followed by a review of their abstracts.
Despite our aggressive search strategy it is possible that some citations were missed, and the difficulty in accurately retrieving citations of group-authored articles, in particular, has been documented [13], [14].
As shown in Figure 1, users can either search PubMed or use other systems for retrieving citations in PubMed.
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