The sentence "categorise papers" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use this sentence when you want to refer to organizing papers into distinct categories. For example, "I need to categorise these papers according to their subject matter."
The 1988 Swedish study [7] was one of the most thorough early studies, and used sixfolds as the criterion to categorise paper into the most degraded, with "many tears and/or pieces missing, worn edges, slight to strong yellowing, breaking corner on sixfolds".
Finally, we categorised papers as either: a 'key paper'conceptuallylly rich and could potentially make an important contribution to the synthesis'); a satisfactory paper; a paper that is irrelevant to the synthesis; a methodologically fatally flawed paper [ 22].
Finally, we categorised papers as either: a 'key paper' (KP) that is 'conceptually rich and could potentially make an important contribution to the synthesis'; a satisfactory paper (SAT); fatally flawed (FF); irrelevant to the synthesis [ 3].
An overview framework is constructed to categorise the papers, and to illustrate key actors and factors for sustainable production and consumption.
Whilst there are doubtless many alternative ways of categorising the papers by theme, and any such categorisation overlooks areas of overlap and linkage, we will summarise the papers in three broad groupings: the practices of assuring quality in healthcare; giving 'space to the story'; and addressing moral complexity in the clinic, the classroom and the academy.
In our citation analysis, we categorised four papers as historical.
These theoretical underpinnings will serve as a rationale or framework for categorising the papers.
An assessment of the theoretical frameworks underpinning the guidance was made and served as a rationale for categorising the papers.
These ratings were then combined to categorise each paper as "key", "adequate and relevant" or "flawed or not relevant" (Appendix 1).
