Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(60)
Two reviewers assessed the quality of studies independently.
The quality of studies was assessed from ten items.
Firstly, the quality of studies for the meta-analysis was not high.
After full-text review, the quality of studies eligible for inclusion was evaluated.
Many tools have been proposed for assessing the quality of studies.
Prior to 2002 when PET examination was first included in the National Health Insurance, the quality of studies was high.
Two independent reviewers evaluated the quality of studies using the risk of bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration [28].
The main aim of these recommendations is to improve the quality of studies of headache prevalence and burden.
The quality of studies was assessed using a standardised tool and rated as strong, moderate or weak.
Assessing the quality of studies is sensitive to written information provided in the published manuscripts.
The quality of studies varies widely as detailed in table S1.
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