English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background In RCTs with a continuous outcome, it is easier to interpret a difference in proportions at high risk than the difference in means. For example when comparing lung function in two groups, a difference in proportion <10 centile may be more clinically meaningful than the difference in means. However choosing a dichotomised continuous outcome at the outset requires a larger sample than using the raw data and may also distort the true difference since data are discarded on dichotomisation.

Making core outcomes more clinically meaningful: 2-for-the-price-of-1 with a distributional approach