The phrase "aggregate findings" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when summarizing or combining results from multiple sources or studies to present a comprehensive overview.
Example: "The researchers aimed to aggregate findings from various studies to draw more robust conclusions about the effectiveness of the treatment."
Alternatives: "combined results" or "summarized outcomes".
In brief, the aggregated list of rater labels was statistically analysed (see below), the aggregate findings were sent out to the reviewers for a second rating round if the consensus coefficient was <0.800.
The F.A.A. report acknowledged that it could be argued that the wiring issue might not pose an immediate safety risk, but said that "the aggregate findings of the workmanship quality raised the specter of a cumulative safety risk".
We then combined the results from those studies that concerned modern data in a "meta-analysis," a powerful statistical procedure that allowed us to compare and aggregate findings across the individual studies.
Individual-level analyses confirm aggregate findings.
In addition to trainings, agencies providing substance use prevention services should consider developing or strengthening mechanisms to share aggregate findings across youth so that staff can recognize incremental, positive gains attributed to prevention services.
Given the diversity of contexts where health staff are at risk, the variations in alarm system, and the varying range of other preventive measures in place alongside alarms it would have made little sense to aggregate findings from field trials.
Just 28percentt said they think school officials would take action against an offender in sexual assault cases, compared to the AAU aggregate finding of 45percentt of students nationwide thinking this is likely to happen at their university.
For example, University of Chicago behavioral scientists found that less experienced pathologists' aggregated findings were better at predicting a cancer patient's survival time, based on viewing a biopsy slide than the expert pathologists' conclusions.
Our approach does not involve use of interpretive processes to develop new theoretical concepts, but entails aggregating findings so as to draw out clinical, policy and/or educational implications.
The style adopted by some was descriptive rather than conceptual (e.g., papers S4, S5, S20, S26) and/or read like a narrative synthesis, in which they had aggregated findings from primary studies, or a thematic synthesis (e.g., papers S2, S5, S12, S21, S26).
However, the consistency between aggregate group findings and the within-clinician findings, for those clinicians who reported on patients belonging to different comparison groups, makes such an interpretation less likely.
