The phrase "a generally accepted standard" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when referring to a norm or criterion that is widely recognized and followed within a particular field or context.
Example: "In the field of software development, using version control systems is considered a generally accepted standard."
Alternatives: "a widely recognized benchmark" or "a commonly accepted criterion."
Although there has never been a generally accepted standard written form of Ottawa, interest in standardization has increased with the publication of a widely used dictionary in 1985 and reference grammar in 2001, which provide models for spelling conventions.
Thirty percent is a generally accepted standard, and there are plenty of single-parent households as well as families where, for various reasons, only one member is able to work.
Parents perceived twice daily tooth brushing as a generally accepted standard of behaviour (social norm).
In the training workshops, a care pathway implementation protocol will be used that is based on the Deming-PDSA cycle, a generally accepted standard method for quality improvement [ 40].
Because of the emergence of MDR-TB, surgery has been re-introduced as an option within the generally accepted standard of care in treating TB infections.
According to the generally accepted standard an alpha value should not fall below 0.70 [ 16].
The generally accepted standard is that a ligand-receptor binding with a K d of 1 nmol/L or less has a high affinity, whereas ligands binding with a K d of 1 µmol/L or more have low affinity (Davenport and Russell 1996).
· Assuming such a field is identifiable, what percentage of that "community" must find the evidence acceptable to satisfy the "generally accepted" standard?
Assuming such a field is identifiable, what percentage of that "community" must find the evidence acceptable to satisfy the "generally accepted" standard?
Field plots are usually 1-ha in size (the generally accepted standard for a forest plot inventory [16]) but forest inventories that use smaller plot designs run the risk of the plots being even less representative of the surrounding forest [17].
The generally accepted standard of "significance" is a p value of less than 0.05, which appears to translate into a 95% chance that the result is not purely the result of chance.
