Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(15)
It is not just about crossing, I can score normal goals too.
MPS defects were defined with a summed stress score (normal summed stress score <4, abnormal summed stress score>or=4).
However, the results of 24-h esophageal pH monitoring showed worsening acid reflux: the number of refluxes was 152 times, pH was below 4.0 for 60.5 %, mean pH was 3.73, and DeMeester score (normal <14.75) was 211.6 (Fig. 4).
A 24-h esophageal pH monitoring revealed significant acid reflux: the number of refluxes was 81 times, pH was below 4.0 for 32.1 %, mean pH was 4.55, and DeMeester score (normal <14.75) was 117.5 (Fig. 4).
The LipiView evaluates lipid layer thickness through an Interference Color Unit score (normal average ICU score is ≥75).
As surrogates of dietary intake, dysphagia score (normal swallowing=0; dysphagia to solids=1; dysphagia to softened foods=2; dysphagia to liquids=3; and total dysphagia=4) and subjective diet score (normal dietary intake=1; reduced dietary intake=2; and poor dietary intake=3) were assessed in a subset of patients (n=188).
Similar(45)
The difference in mean score and in coefficient of variance was lowest in the assessment of the EAI, this might partially be due to the four step score normal-mild-moderate-severe.
Bone mineral density (T-score) Normal: 0 to –1 Low bone density: –1 to –2.5 Osteoporosis: –2.5 or lower.
Only 7 of our 31 patients (22.6 %) had scores normal in all domains and in the total scores.
Thorough examination is necessary to identify optimal data pre-processing options. 1 Also referred as conversion to z-scores, z-values, standard scores, normal scores, standardised variables.
Table 3 Comparison of TPI scores in thalassemic and normal children TPI scores Normal occlusion 0 Minor malocclusion 1 3.99 Definite malocclusion 4 6.99 Handicapping malocclusion 7 9.99 Severely handicapping malocclusion >10.0 Thalassemic children 6 26 36 18 14 Normal children 40 37 10 5 3.
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