Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(3)
The phrase "were not statistically significant" is correct and usable in written English
For example, you could use it in a sentence such as: "The results of the study showed that the differences between the two groups were not statistically significant."
Exact(16)
The combination of glaucoma and cataract surgery had a negative effect on the complete success rate, but not in visual acuity, although there were not statistical significant differences (Table 14).
However, cells transfected with dnTCF4 reproducibly showed a modestly reduced amount of TRAIL-induced apoptosis (differences were not statistical significant), which may be consistent with the requirement of the Wnt pathway for optimal TRAIL-induced apoptosis [32] (Fig. 5A).
Seventeen studies showed that Huangqi injection combined with routine treatment was better than routine treatment used alone for the increase in LVEF, while six studies were not statistical significant (Figure 3).
Gender and income were not statistical significant but forced to stay in the model to controlling for their effects.
The set of 25 genes overlapping between cDNA microarrays [ 13] and SAGE were not statistical significant (p > 0.05).
The shapes of the funnel plots seemed approximately symmetrical and P values of the Egger' tests were not statistical significant (P values were all >0.05).
Similar(44)
The difference between the groups was not statistical significant.
The 5% difference in the prevalence of HTN between the two groups was not statistical significant.
As shown in column 2, the coefficient of the exposure to PM10 per state is not statistical significant.
The difference in log-transformed mean anaerobic counts between both procedures was not statistical significant (p = 0.108), but there were significantly less culture-positive implants after the decontamination procedure in the phosphoric acid group (p = 0.042).
Group 1 had increased Klebsiella compared to group 2. The Klebsiella was also more abundant in group 1 than group 3 although it was not statistical significant (p = 0.06, q = 0.36).
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