Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(9)
The cost of a planned Caesarean section was estimated at £2,369, with a planned vaginal birth costing £1,665.
The volume of Ringer's acetate administered perioperatively during caesarean section was estimated to be 600 ml before delivery.
In addition, the proportion of Ron+ cancer cells in the representative tumour section was estimated on a scale from 0%to100%0% for each staining level.
Work against gravity, friction, and air resistance for this section was estimated to be approximately 54, 36, and 10%, respectively, of the total work.
The volume of cells within the same section was estimated by point counting using the Cavalieri principle (Gundersen and Jensen 1987) and the numerical density of enhanced gold particles in cell volume was estimated on 70-nm-thick resin sections.
Therefore, minimum and maximum thickness of AF section was estimated by taking, respectively, 1st and 99th percentile of data set corresponding to all optical sections (15 30 sections, 3 5 stacks) taken at the same experimental conditions.
Similar(51)
Ice depths in this highest section are estimated, from surface gradients, to be little more than 420 feet (130 metres).
The cost of a caesarean section is estimated at A$14,000 in Australia, compared with more than A$20,000 in the US, figures compiled by the Lancet show.
The three set of regressions presented in this section were estimated with OLS and GLS in order to test the robustness of the IV estimates.
Note that volume fractions of aqueous fluids for the horizontally isolated low-velocity zone in the upper crust beneath the central section are estimated to be 0.2 0.3%.
Based on the optical parameters and microscope specifications of the video images in Additional file 2: video with Fig. 5 and Additional file 3: video with Fig. 6, the thickness of the confocal planar optical section is estimated at about 0.62 and 0.68 μm for TRITC and Cy5 channels, respectively, when accounting for pinhole size (Pawley 2006; Borlinghaus 2011).
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