Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(3)
Articles were assessed for study quality.
The 12 intervention studies were assessed for study quality.
The remaining 17 articles were assessed for study quality, with a further article being discounted, as it was deemed to be of insufficient quality.
Similar(57)
Each included study was assessed for study quality using the 'QualSyst' tool, a standard checklist of 14 items (Kmet et al, 2004).
Studies were assessed for quality, with only high quality studies included for analysis.
All relevant papers were assessed for quality using the Quality Assessment of the Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy Included in Systematic Reviews (QUADAS) criteria [12].
Included studies were assessed for quality based on study methodology, validity of dietary assessment, success of follow-up, standardized assessment of CVD, ischemic heart disease, or myocardial infarction endpoints and appropriateness of statistical adjustment.
Risk of bias assessment The studies included were assessed for methodological quality, to get an impression of the quality of published scientific studies based on registries.
The studies were assessed for methodological quality by two reviewers using the procedures of Bland and colleagues.
The selected studies were assessed for methodological quality using the "risk of bias" tool of the Cochrane Collaboration [11].
Studies were assessed for methodological quality.
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