Sentence examples for bias associated with differences from inspiring English sources

In the past, manual control methods to mask review films presented in practice have been used to reduce potential interpretive bias associated with differences between viewing images for patient care and reviewing images for the purposes of research, education, and quality improvement.

Propensity score adjustment was used to remove bias associated with differences in the distributions of observed covariates in beneficiary and non-beneficiary groups [ 30, 31].

We used standardization by the annual total of all specimens tested for the specific pathogen to reduce possible bias associated with differences in specimen sampling and laboratory methods over time [ 14, 21].

In addition, investigators targeted enrollment of geographically diverse patients to limit the potential bias associated with differences in practice patterns and to account for variation in disease prevalence (eg, endemic mycoses) that could alter management decisions.

Although the monocentric character is an obvious limitation, this single-centre study with a protocol for managing rectal bleeding and carried out over a relatively short period, had limited or no bias associated with differences in practices between centres or changes in practices.

20 As there was only one female in the explosive blast mTBI group, to eliminate possible bias associated with gender differences in HcV, the data from only the male controls (n = 12) were compared with those of the male veterans.

Townshend JM, Duka T. Attentional bias associated with alcohol cues: differences between heavy and occasional social drinkers.

Construction of all regions of interest was based on anatomical criteria rather than peak activation coordinates in order to avoid possible sampling bias associated with between-group differences in peak location.

The selection bias associated with TWA studies has been tackled by individual Differences-in-Differences (iDiD) and conditional Differences-in-Differences (cDiD).

Thus, we avoid the selection bias associated with attribution to payment by results of differences between trusts that determined whether they received foundation status.

Sensitivity analyses assessing potential bias associated with unblinded follow-up assessments identified small differences in the effect sizes for the primary outcomes but the conclusions were not changed (results not presented).