Stringing sentences together that largely repeat the same information is a writing issue I often see with scientific and technical professionals, and it hampers readability. Sometimes this tendency creeps in because the writer is focused on being precise, or overuses the technique of making a general statement before a specific one. Or it happens because they simply miss the opportunity to consolidate the information. Here’s an example:
Before: Comparative biodegradation rates of drug candidates A and B in screening testing showed only minor differences, which would not be observed in higher-tier testing. There were minor differences in the initial degradation rate (i.e., the rate over the first 24 hours) and the dissolution rate, which was impacted by the salinity of the medium. The former (3% faster initial rate for Drug A) is common in exaggerated laboratory conditions, and the latter (Drug A was formulated with 10% salinity vs. Drug B with 2% salinity) is a by-product of the experimental configuration and also would not be detected in higher-tier testing conditions. As a result, we conclude that the differences in biodegradation rate would not be significant in a real-world scenario and should not be considered as a part of the final Drug selection criteria.
Relevant topic sentence? Check.
Logical construction? Check.
Repetitive? Definitely! The last sentence repeats ideas that come before, and the second and third sentences are similar enough that they cry out for consolidation. Check how these sentences were merged, and how other unnecessary words and phrases were cut, to make it much easier for the reader to follow your points.
After: Comparative biodegradation rates of drug candidates A and B in screening testing showed only minor differences, which would not be observed in higher-tier testing. The differences observed were (a) a 3% greater initial (first 24 hours) rate for Drug A, and (b) slower dissolution rate of Drug A resulting from its higher salinity (10% vs. 2% for Drug B). Both results are by-products of exaggerated laboratory conditions, so biodegradation rate need not be considered as part of the final Drug selection criteria.