Despite mechanical, physical and thermal properties highly depend on several parameters when residues are classified and results are related to the relative variation of density, a good correlation, between different papers, is found.
However, variability of test results may occur between different papers due to different experimental conditions, which may affect the speciation and thus, bioavailability of metals.
Possible interactions between different paper and plastic components in mixtures were also investigated.
Drawn from a multidisciplinary collaboration which culminated in 2015, the six papers selected for the SI are then briefly described, highlighting contributions and intersections between the different papers.
This was an iterative and inductive process in which we explored relationships between the different papers and long-term conditions to create new insight and meaning.
A consequence of difference between the ballooning terms obtained in different papers is a difference between the ballooning instability thresholds found in different works (e.g., Liu, 1997; Mazur et al., 2012 versus Miura et al., 1989; Miura, 2000, 2004).
Both of these correlations remain significant if we control for the differences in the means of different papers (partial correlation between in vitro vs in murine controlling for differences between manuscripts, df = 20, r = 0.775, P < 0.001; partial correlation between competition versus growth rate controlling for differences between manuscripts, df = 52, r = 0.752, P < 0.001).
Drawing direct comparisons between results presented in different papers is challenging because of varying methodologies, sample sizes, material properties, such as age, moisture and porosity, and experimental goals.
Part of the disparity between the results in the different papers on intensive treatment in ICU patients (19, 24, 25) could be the result of the nutritional therapy used in the different studies.
Consequently, a large variety of methodologies are described by the papers, which could also (partially) explain the variability in the reported outcomes between the studies, i.e. the different papers did not necessarily measure the same events.
Table 1 Comparison between different strategies Papers Comm.
