Systems can be categorized according to how they optimize several quantities including the fragmentation of disk-resident objects, the amount of wasted space, and adaptation to the evolving access patterns of an application.
Moreover, when studies were categorized according to how the outcome was assessed (patient self-report, medical chart review, or administrative data), similar results were observed (Table 1).
Participants were also categorized according to how often they entered data in the MHCR: data entry once a week or more often and data entry a few times per month or less often.
The business pages are categorized, too, similar to how Facebook Pages list the type of business underneath their name.
To further understand the significance of the ALC/AMC ratio ⩾1.1 recovery during each treatment cycle phase, we categorized patients according to how many cycles the ALC/AMC ratio ⩾1.1 was observed.
In the figure, we categorized approaches according to how they are typically used in the medical literature (e.g. NNT and NNH are typically used for single outcomes), but listed a few of them in two categories if we could not clearly categorize them (e.g. Minimum Target Event Risk for Treatment [MERT], (Quality-adjusted) Time without Symptoms and Toxicity).
In both the previous (template) study and the present (registration) study, 2 surgeons and 2 allograft coordinators were asked to categorize allografts according to how well they matched the recipient.
At one point the census categorized some blacks according to how many white ancestors they had.
Based on our own interview study with psychotherapists (PTs) we categorized psychotherapeutic errors into technical, judgemental, normative and system errors – similar to how Charles Bosk categorized medical errors [ 1, 4].
