Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(7)
The following categories were used for scoring: intensity (None, Mild, Moderate, and Strong) and percent positive (none or rare, < 10% nuclear staining, 10 25%, 25 50%, and >50%).
Immunolabeling was evaluated in a blinded fashion by two independent investigators using an H score (range 0 12) by scoring intensity (0 3) multiplied by extent (0 4).
These showed correction of the inter-operator bias by BCTI with κ for scoring intensity increasing from 0.59 to 0.81, indicative of almost perfect agreement.
The highest scoring intensity boxes are then considered in various combinations.
Our results confirm that even in the relatively less complex scenario of a single CTC sitting on a filter, there is still considerable between-operator variability in the assignment of a scoring intensity.
The bounding boxes of the blobs are then weighted and ranked based on the size of the box and the frequency of occurrence: a high scoring intensity box is expected to be close in size to the average bounding box of a single parasite.
Similar(53)
The scored intensities of cytoplasmic immunoreactivity was + in 21 (24.4%) specimens, ++ in 32 (37.2%) and +++ in 3 (3.4%).
Once immunohistochemistry had been carried out, each core was assessed by light microscopy and scored by an experienced scorer using a weighted histoscore ((% tumour cells scoring at intensity 1)+(2 × % scoring at intensity 2)+(3 × % scoring at intensity 3)).
Musculoskeletal and psychological complaints were recorded by monthly reports the four months preceding and 12 months succeeding a work session in the laboratory; complaint-severity indices were computed from complaint-severity scores (intensity score × duration score).
A multiplied score (intensity score × percentage score) <2 was considered as negative staining, 2 3 as low staining, 4 6 as medium staining and >6 as high staining.
Score: Intensity of cytoplasmic staining x percent of tumor cells.
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