Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(6)
A systematic review of validity facets in portfolio research: hit the target and don't miss the point.
Otherwise, like Kogan et al.'s review of validity (Kogan et al. 2009), our review reveals a general lack of evidence of validity.
We extracted design elements addressing each using consensus design practices identified in a systematic review of validity threats in preclinical research (Henderson et al., 2013).
For each eligible experiment, we extracted experimental design elements derived from a prior systematic review of validity threats in preclinical research (Henderson et al., 2013).
In a review of validity among comorbidity indices, de Groot, et al, systemically identified articles referring to comorbidity between 1966 and 2000.
1 23 48 Similarly, a recent review of validity of diagnoses in CPRD reported a positive predictive value of diagnosis of MI coded in CPRD of over 80%, with comparable reliability of coding for ischaemic heart disease to other primary care databases, 26 although literature on identification of vascular diseases in EHR databases is sparse.
Similar(54)
Reviews of validity and reliability of HIV research show that sexual behavior data are fairly consistent and self-reported data on sexual acts are reasonably congruent, especially for short recall periods.
A comprehensive review of the validity and reliability of such observational tools found evidence of predictive validity (in terms of levels of MSD symptoms or diagnosed cases) for only 12 of the 32 tools examined, and for only 2 of the 12 was this evidence from longitudinal rather than cross-sectional studies [ 55].
A systematic review of the validity of reporting in GPRD found just one validation study, on sudden death, which was well reported [ 18].
A review of diagnostic validity studies reported a pooled sensitivity of 77.1% and specificity of 66.1% [ 48].
A review of the validity of retrospective responses showed that such reports can be used, although responses concerning adverse conditions are likely to be substantially biased [ 72, 73].
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