Your English writing platform
Free sign upSuggestions(2)
Exact(60)
An initial sample size calculation was calculated to detect a difference of 0.5 kg/m in mean BMI between the two groups, with 80% power and 95% significance level, assuming a standard deviation of 1.5.
The McGill Pain Questionnaire was pre-defined as the primary outcome measure, and sample size was calculated to detect a difference of 8 units on the total pain rating index of this instrument after 8 weeks of healing.
A nonparametric correlation coefficient was calculated to detect correlation between the two groups.
A sample size of 422 patients was calculated to detect a 15% absolute reduction in mortality in the peripheral perfusion group with 90% power and two-tailed type I error of 5%.
FCD was calculated to detect the brain regions with abnormal functional activity over the whole brain, and the seed-based RSFC was performed to explore the functional network changes in MOH and EM.
The sample size was calculated to detect a 50%% reduction in wound closure time from 240 s with sutures to 120 s, with a standard deviation of 120 s, with tissue adhesive at a two-tailed significance level of 0.05 with a power of 95%%.
Subsequently, a protein abundance index (emPAI) was calculated to detect the polypeptide sequences that were highly abundant among the captured glycoproteins (Tables S1, S2, S3, S4, S5).
Therefore, a sample size of 219 catheter episodes per group was calculated to detect a hypothesized 50%-reduction of endoluminal CRBSI with 80% power (α = .05).05
Sample size was calculated to detect a difference of 10 µmol/L (SD 8) in mean L-arginine concentration between the AA and the CC genotypes.
A revised sample size was calculated to detect a difference from 1% (the best likely failure rate in any arm) and 15% (above which no drug could be deployed).
The sample size was calculated to detect a FCT difference of approximately 48 hours between gatifloxacin (assumed median FCT 156 hrs) and cefixime (assumed median FCT 204 hrs) [14] with p = 0.05 and power = 80%.
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