— NATHANIEL POPPER Nelson D. Schwartz of The Times has annotated a comparison of the statement issued after the Federal Open Market Committee meeting that just ended and the previous statement in May.
The thematic analysis was conducted through a comparison of the root cause statements and recommendations generated for each individual case in order to identify patterns within the data.
Textual data was structured in matrices with rows for the thematic areas, this allowed for comparison of statements among the respondents.
A comparison with the statement of Theorem 6.1 above and the statement of Theorem 3.3 in [43] suggests that the optimal power could be (alpha =max {2,p}), but we have no examples in this direction.
Comparison of the investigated materials leads to the statement that the highest activity towards the HER exhibit Ni + Mo deposits.
Comparison of the composite scores of a Statement of Treatment Preferences indicated that congruence in decision-making for future medical treatment in patient-surrogate pairs in the treatment group was significantly higher than in the control group.
Comparison of the clinicians' main choice of statement with that of the public and the patients revealed that Statement FF' was supported by 23% (37 out of 160) of patients and by 19% (60 out of 322) of the public.
The data analysis was based in grounded theory [34], [35], which relies on the process of constant comparison of qualitative data (statements) retrieved from participants.
The authors of this paper are researchers participating in an international collaborative study addressing comparisons of the credibility of statements heard in cases involving child sexual abuse (CSA).
The first entails a process of integration for each comparison group through the statement of a core category: that is, a few words, a sentence or a conceptual idea that goes to the heart of the phenomenon.
