The phrase "are comparatively uncommon" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when comparing the frequency or occurrence of something in relation to other things, indicating that it is less common.
Example: "These species of plants are comparatively uncommon in this region, making them a rare find for botanists."
Alternatives: "are relatively rare" or "are less frequently seen".
Foreclosures are comparatively uncommon.
The radially fractured domes of the early stages are comparatively uncommon, while the concentric scars characteristic of mature coronae are among the most numerous large tectonic features on the planet.
The classical myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are comparatively uncommon in children and display a degree of mutational naivety if considering the high frequency of known MPN driver events observed in the corresponding adult diseases.
However, for salamanders, deletions are comparatively uncommon and, when they do happen, fewer than average base pairs are jettisoned, compared with other vertebrates.
Model calibration (inference of unknown parameters by fitting models to data) and sensitivity analysis are comparatively uncommon, occurring in 35% and 36% of studies respectively, but their application is increasing.
Breast cancer in men is comparatively uncommon, and is not considered further here.
Rather, body dissatisfaction and eating disordered behaviour appear to be comparatively uncommon among underweight women.
Research addressing care and management of the person with dementia, including palliative and person-centred approaches, is comparatively uncommon, which is surprising considering growing evidence of the terminal nature of the condition [ 2].
Pure vascular cognitive impairment is comparatively uncommon in contrast to mixed AD with SVD, and usually presents with an insidious decline in cognition and a frontal-subcortical dementia with memory benefitting from cueing [ 90, 91].
Dravet syndrome is comparatively uncommon, with an estimated incidence of <1 40 000 children (Hurst, 1990; Dravet et al., 2005), but important to diagnose because it is considered at least in part an epileptic encephalopathy, though other factors may contribute to outcomes (Ragona et al., 2011).
