Exact(1)
Wheat samples were categorized up to 92 % of the time correctly using six wavelengths: 484, 567, 684, 817, 900, and 950 nm.
Similar(59)
If reasonable for calculation of the odds ratios, the data were categorized in up to four categories.
Significantly differentially expressed miRNAs (normalized intensity ≥ 300, absolute Log2 ratio ≥ 1, absolute fold change ≥ 1, and FDR < 0.05) were categorized into up- and downregulated genes for each radiation dose.
In this respect, the significant 28 T-UCRs were categorized as up- or down-expressed in each NB sample according to their respective cut-off values identified by ROC curves.
Differentially expressed candidates were categorized into up- and downregulated genes and microRNAs, and divided into three groups: TB versus healthy control, LTBI versus healthy control, and LTBI versus TB.
Those who did not test and who seroconverted during follow-up were categorized as positive in the analysis.
Those who did not endorse insulin restriction at baseline but did endorse insulin restriction at follow-up were categorized as "new insulin restriction".
Those who endorsed insulin restriction at baseline but no longer endorsed insulin restriction at follow-up were categorized as "stopped insulin restriction".
Those who endorsed insulin restriction at baseline and continued to endorse insulin restriction at follow-up were categorized as "continued insulin restriction".
Afterward, they were categorized by the follow-up period of readmission, short-term outcome studies (30 and 90 days after discharge) and long-term outcome studies (6 months and 1 year after discharge), which formed two groups of analysis.
We used a similar approach to classify participants into four categories according to their responses to the same screening question at follow-up: Those who did not endorse insulin restriction at baseline and continued not to endorse insulin restriction at follow-up were categorized as "never restricted".
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