The phrase "assessment twice" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when referring to the act of evaluating or measuring something on two separate occasions or instances.
Example: "To ensure accuracy, we will conduct the assessment twice, once at the beginning and once at the end of the program."
Alternatives: "evaluation two times" or "review on two occasions".
The Meyers, Mr. D'Agnillo's neighbors, have challenged their property assessment twice, but failed both times.
The internship undergoes a collaborative assessment twice a year, once before the end of the first semester and once before the end of the year.
The internship undergoes a collaborative assessment twice a year, once at the end of the first semester and once at the end of the year.
Follow-up included serological (IFAT) assessment twice a year with parasitological Leishmania confirmation, and clinical evaluation performed every 3 months on seroconverted dogs from both groups.
Using a repeated measures design, 40 men and women completed an NFR threshold assessment twice within session one, and twice again during a second session conducted 24 h later.
Patients were randomly assigned to one of four arms, in which they completed the geriatric assessment twice: (1) REDCap and paper and pencil in sessions 1 and 2; (2) REDCap in both sessions; (3) SupportScreen and paper and pencil in sessions 1 and 2; and (4) SupportScreen in both sessions.
Although the year 2 tutors undertook assessments twice, only eight significant correlations between the behavioural measures and cognitive test scores were found.
39 Community medical auxiliaries conducted home based assessments twice daily and provided directly observed treatment with study drugs; all participants were also seen at the hospital on day 10.
*Baseline consists of five assessments and BPDSI, GAF and SOFAS are assessed twice at baseline.
Of the group who did not respond (n = 94), 14 refused participation, 23 were not located, and 57 received the assessment form twice (according to instructions from the Norwegian Data Inspectorate) but did not answer it.
Of the group that did not respond at follow-up (n = 94), 14 patients actively refused to participate, 23 were not located, and 57 subjects received the assessment form twice (limit set by the Norwegian Data Inspectorate), but did not reply to it.
