Especially, the internal validity is scored very low (4.4 out of 11), which may be associated with the lack of blinding in all studies.
For example, when only the Gene Ontology Annotation Similarity Score was used, interactions between ATF2_HUMAN and MK01_HUMAN (MAPK1, ERK) or ELK1_HUMAN and MK08_HUMAN (JNK1) were either scored very low or missed all together.
Aggregation of CD4+ T cells around the pericyst was scored as very low to low (from 0 to max 67 cells/filed, mean: 29 ± 18.94 cells/field) with less disparity regarding the number of infiltrated cells between individual samples and was not significantly different than that in SH and CH biopsies.
Adolescents were scored from 0 (very low SES) to 8 (very high SES).
Each activity that scored "very high" for the activity scored a 5, and each activity that scored "high," "medium," "low", and "very low" were scored, respectively, as 4, 3, 2 and 1, based on the assumptions that the ratio between each category is the same and that each attribute has the same importance to describe an innovation.
Each animal was scored as either normal, low quality alae (very thin and rough sections) or gapped alae (discontinuous alae).
In the reduced model, the factor "diet, content of fermentable carbohydrates", was scored in four levels (from very low intake to poor diet) based on the baseline interviews.
CES is measured by asking a single question: "How much effort did you personally have to put forth to handle your request?" It is scored on a scale from 1 (very low effort) to 5 (very high effort).
These risks are scored on a five-point scale (1 – very low, 5 – very high risk) against criteria outlined in this paper.
In addition, APGAR scores may not be predictive of outcome unless the score is very low at 5 minutes, and in busy labour wards the scores are often recorded after the event, if at all.
