The phrase "a true comparison between" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing the differences or similarities between two or more subjects, emphasizing the authenticity of the comparison.
Example: "In this study, we aim to provide a true comparison between the effectiveness of the two teaching methods."
Alternatives: "an accurate comparison of" or "a genuine comparison between".
"We're hopeful that the analysis will reaffirm the correctness of moving forward with the reclamation, but we have to have a true comparison between the two options".
Previous research has found slightly higher numbers of national food allergy prevalence, but the researchers say that a true comparison between the new and the previous findings would not be meaningful because of different methodologies, criteria and population sizes.
In order to register the volumes better and make a true comparison between the segmented surface from the orthogonal scans, the projection images and the segmented surface are interpolated (along the smaller dimension) to make them isotropic.
But a true comparison between separately acquired PET and CT images, visual fusion, software fusion, and integrated PET/CT images can hardly be achieved, as this implies the acquisition of multiple scans with a high cumulative radiation burden to the patient.
Secondly, the lack of detailed reporting meant that there was some doubt about whether or not the study by Kassaian et al was a true comparison between home based and hospital based cardiac rehabilitation or was, instead, a comparison of hospital based cardiac rehabilitation and usual care.
Only with inclusion of a reference treatment a true comparison of the efficacy between preparations can be achieved [ 4].
However, if we compare the integrated intensities, then all these effects that redistribute the intensity are captured, and a true comparison can be made between theory and experiment.
While there have been many advances in quartet puzzling over the past years (see [ 17, 20, 26] for example) we used the traditional puzzling algorithm to allow a more true comparison between invariant based puzzling and traditional maximum likelihood puzzling.
Significant strengths of this study design are related to the homogeneity of patient groups examined as well as the similarities between the two hospitals allowing a more true comparison between factors associated with hospital-specific practice differences without the usual confounders of differing patient characteristics or even geographic differences between hospitals and patients.
The selection of two different study groups limits a true comparison of pulmonary function test values between the two dive exposures (open ocean or air chamber dive), and the difference in body positioning during hyperbaric exposures (prone in the SCUBA group vs. seated upright in the chamber group), which could have potentially altered patterns of blood flow and VGE clearance within the lung.
Hence, a true comparison of the scaling in power consumption and cost between different topologies is difficult.
