Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(8)
Control screening examinations as a follow-up are typically done for breast and cervical cancer screening to check unclear test results.
Necessary control screening examinations checked unclear test results from the previous health check-up one year year before and could especially explain the coefficient for the first order lag.
When necessary, unclear test items could be clarified by the interviewer.
In all, 339 (61.5%) were positive test results, 36.8% were negative test results, 8 (1.5%) were incomplete kits (all returned one unclear test), and 1 (0.2%) was a spoilt kit unsuitable to be read.
Those with one unclear test were diagnosed with their cancer significantly sooner (7.5 vs 12.8 months from completion of the FOB test, t=2.987, P=0.003) to those with one normal test.
26 Persistence in screening behaviour, control follow-ups to check unclear test results from the previous health check-up and shorter recommended time intervals for some of the analysed health check-up (blood pressure check, cholesterol test, dental screening and eyesight test) are of importance to explain the significance of the 1-year lagged dependent variable as predictor variable.
Similar(52)
However, the lack of a gold standard for the diagnosis of LTBI, scarcity of data regarding the long term predictive value of IGRAs, and the very poor agreement among the three tests makes it unclear which test is optimal.
Finally, there were several areas in the text where p-values are given, but it is unclear what test was being run.
In all, 15 (7.8%) interval cancers had one unclear FOB test first before having two normal tests.
All interval cancers were diagnosed after an overall normal FOBt, with 15 (7.8%) interval cancers submitting one unclear FOB test first, before having two normal tests.
It is unclear why test model aa was more efficiently processed by efmtool than other test models, since all models were derived from the same source.
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