Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(7)
This last measure should help assess potential room for improvement in the management of suspicious screening results.
Blood samples were collected from 121 females referred for diagnostic mammography following an initial suspicious screening mammogram.
Participants with suspicious screening test scores or who show signs and symptoms of disease during follow-up undergo further workup leading to a reference standard test.
Because biopsy is painful and invasive, it is infeasible and unethical to do a biopsy unless there are suspicious screening test results.
When only suspicious screening test scores trigger a sensitive and specific secondary test, the result is a form of partial verification bias.
Because the biopsy is invasive and can be done only if a lesion is observed, it is unethical and infeasible to do a biopsy unless there are suspicious screening test results.
Similar(53)
The cancers appeared suspicious on screening mammograms.
However, anxiety, physical discomfort and experiences of finding "something suspicious" during screening prompted a revisiting of their risk-reducing surgery decisions.
The professional suspicious NIs screening strategy was based upon specific diagnostic criteria for certain infection sites; these took into consideration positive microbiological examinations, antibiotic administration, serological and molecular testing (e.g. C-reactive protein, calcitonin), positive imaging reports, temperature, invasive device use, and inpatient transfer data.
Cancers characterized by suspicious microcalcifications at screening were associated with a lower risk of advanced screen detected cancer, which can be explained by the fact that ductal carcinoma in-situ frequently shows microcalcifications as the only mammographic abnormality.
Compared to non-advanced cancers, advanced screen detected cancers were more frequently characterized by abnormal densities and less frequently by suspicious microcalcifications at screening (p < 0.001) and comprised more invasive lobular cancers and fewer invasive ductal cancers (p < 0.001, Table 2).
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