Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(7)
The group with the lowest total summarised risk points and the group with lowest summarised risk points for biological risk markers had a significant lower risk for cancer compared with the group with the highest summarised risk points.
The groups with lowest summarised total risk points and lowest separate summarised risk points for lifestyle and biological risk markers had a significantly lower risk for fatal and non-fatal CVD, compared with the groups with highest summarised risk points.
As explanatory variables biological and lifestyle factors as well as summarised risk points, calculated from the health profile, were used.
The group with the lowest summarised total risk points had a significantly lower risk for CVD and cancer compared with the group with the highest summarised risk points.
The risk points for lifestyle and biological risk makers were also divided in the groups with summarised risk points 3 5, 6 8 and 9 14, respectively.
The participants were divided in three groups based on summarised risk points from lifestyle (smoking, physical activity, alcohol consumption) and biological risk markers (body mass index (BMI), blood pressure, serum cholesterol) selected from the health profile.
Similar(50)
Summarising risk estimates from high-quality studies strengthened the inverse association between physical activity and renal cancer risk (RR=0.78; 95% CI=0.66 0.92).
We also evaluated how systematic reviews summarised the risk of bias across individual trials, how many systematic reviews included≥1 trial at high risk of bias, how many systematic reviews included≥1 trial at unclear risk of bias and how such assessments were interpreted in the abstract, discussion and conclusions section of the systematic review.
Dichotomous outcomes were summarised as risk (relative) ratios.
We summarised the risk of bias for the selected outcome within each trial (across domains).
Analysis outcomes are summarised using risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals.
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