Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(2)
Using the mean results from 10 ground motions is also less stringent than using the maximum of three records.
A traditional power calculation was performed by using the mean results (± standard deviations [SD]) of total piperaquine exposure from the noncompartmental analysis reported previously (16).
Similar(58)
Treatment effect was statistically evaluated using the mean score result (i.e. percentage of stained nuclei) for each treatment group (i.e., control, sodium butyrate, tributyrin or various concentrations).
Parallel investigations were made with the data summarised per individual using the mean values, but results where similar (data not shown).
For a single missing value, a replacement was calculated using the mean value of the results on either side of the absent result.
For a single missing value (most often thrombocytes and bilirubin), a value for that parameter was calculated using the mean value of the results on either side of the absent result.
As now reported in Materials and Methods, the Spearman rank correlation between the results using the median and the results using the mean is 0.97.
We therefore elected to use the week 0 results as the baseline measurement for our primary analysis but also presented the results using the mean of the screening and week 0 values as baseline as per protocol (Table 2).
However, the results using the mean of screening and week 0 values as baseline were also computed for comparison.
For this scale, we choose to report results using the mean global score (which in theory can vary from 0 to 56) and the mean number of different categories of affected systems (from 0 to 14 systems) [ 14].
In particular, the repeatability of each test was estimated as the percent mean standard error of the three acquisitions of the test on each specimen and a statistical descriptive analysis was made for all results, using the mean values of repeated tests for each specimen.
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