The phrase "adequacy process" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts related to evaluating or ensuring the sufficiency or appropriateness of a procedure, system, or standard.
Example: "The adequacy process for the new safety regulations will be reviewed next month to ensure compliance."
Alternatives: "sufficiency assessment" or "suitability evaluation."
In these cases, less-conservative criteria for the parameters involved in the SSD adequacy process are introduced which are believed to be more realistic (ex. increased values of deceleration rate and obstacle height).
For example Arndt [30] mentioned that the SSD adequacy process using the design criteria listed in the current design guidelines would lead to very wide shoulders, which was described as uneconomical, whereas in case of maintaining the original shoulder widths, rather conservative speed limit values should be implemented [31].
Process hazard analysis is used to identify hazard scenarios so that the adequacy of process safeguards in protecting against incidents can be addressed.
Quality system, nurse physician relation, patient safety management and staff adequacy were process measures associated with nurse-reported work-related and patient-related outcomes, but we found no associations with nurse participation, education and career and ward leadership.
The most widely adopted measure of process adequacy to hold the tolerances is the process capability.
Furthermore, the properties "[P08] Processes monitoring and control", "[P11] Process adequacy", and "[P18] Adequate order for the implementation of the processes", are related to the factor "[Fa01] Processes". Figure 2 Categories and relationships related to Fa01 — Processes.
For instance, in Figure 1 it can be seen that the type of finding with a positive influence — [Fi16] Existing processes are adequate — and the type of finding with a negative influence — [Fi24] Inadequate processes — show the presence and absence of the property "[P11] Process adequacy", respectively.
The specific research questions were: 1) What is the relevance and adequacy of the process measures identified from a literature review to the local ICU? 2) What are the most clear, concise and descriptive statements for use as checklist items?
In addition to exploring the relevance and adequacy of the process measures, the semi-structured interviews also sought identification of current issues and work practices that could impact on checklist content.
To explore the relevance and adequacy of the process measures local clinician input to checklist content was obtained via semi-structured one-on-one interviews with a purposive sample of clinical staff members at a tertiary level ICU of a university hospital.
