While behaviour can be accounted for without reference to inner motives and thus can be reduced to mere aggregate numbers, making it possible to establish positivistic regularities, and even laws, of collective behaviour, an action can only be interpreted because it is based on a radically subjective attribution of meaning and values to what one does.
However, these results should be interpreted cautiously because only nasopharyngeal swab samples obtained 5 weeks after contact with the index case-patient were tested.
However, logistic regression results for direct bilirubin should be interpreted cautiously because only 1.1% of the whole sample had high levels and CIs were wide.
The discovered main association effects need to be interpreted as trends only because they did not pass FDR procedure.
The 2 definitions differ only in terms of a constant; because AICs should be interpreted only relative to each other rather than in absolute terms, the distinction is not important.
This result must be interpreted very cautiously because only a few studies used an active control group [ 20, 23, 40].
The first subsequent treatment analysis should be interpreted with caution, because only ten FACT-G observations were recorded at the time of subsequent treatment.
These subgroup results should be interpreted with caution, because only a few studies focused on diabetic participants and particular stroke subtypes.
However, these results must be interpreted with caution because only 68% of all S. pneumoniae isolates were serotyped, serotype 3 representing 6.7% of all neumococcal isolates serotyped, which can introduce a biass to the data analysis.
In general, the differences in survival time and clinical duration between donor and recipients have to be interpreted with caution because only single animal to animal transmissions were done.
