compromising on efficacy

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "compromising on efficacy" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing situations where effectiveness or performance is being sacrificed for other considerations, such as cost or convenience. Example: "While we aim to reduce costs, we must be careful not to compromise on efficacy in our product development."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

2 human-written examples

For such settings, in-house production of cost effective WHO recommended hand rub (HR) formulation is an alternative, without compromising on efficacy [ 9, 10].

BMC Health Services Research

We used capecitabine instead of 5-FU as this enables delivery of the fluoropyrimidine in an oral form rather than via a continuous infusion requiring a PICC line, without compromising on efficacy as shown for colorectal cancer in randomised trials (Hoff et al, 2001; Van Cutsem et al, 2001).

British Journal of Cancer

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

58 human-written examples

The search for innovative medicines in disease management without compromising on safety and efficacy is a challenge.

Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica B

Mencius is rejecting the analogy between compromising on ritual propriety to save the country and compromising on propriety to save one's sister-in-law.

SEP

Later they drew fire for compromising on legislative mandates.

The New York Times - Science

Compromising on the Caspian will help a lot.

The Economist

"It has been compromising on fuel economy as well".

The New York Times

But then you are compromising on your own story.

The New York Times

We must make these homes affordable, without compromising on quality.

The Guardian - Opinion

"The body on frame historically has been compromising on ride," he said.

The New York Times

Dr Shetty's goal is to offer as many surgeries as possible, without compromising on quality.

The Economist

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When discussing trade-offs, clarify what benefits are gained by "compromising on efficacy". This provides context and justifies the decision.

Common error

Avoid simply stating that you are "compromising on efficacy" without explaining the reasons or alternative benefits. This can create the impression of negligence or poor planning.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "compromising on efficacy" functions as a gerund phrase acting as a noun, typically used in sentences where the subject is making a decision or facing a situation where the effectiveness must be balanced against other considerations. Ludwig indicates this phrase is grammatically correct.

Expression frequency: Uncommon

Frequent in

Science

60%

News & Media

30%

Formal & Business

10%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "compromising on efficacy" describes a scenario where full effectiveness is traded off for other benefits such as cost, convenience, or reduced side effects. While grammatically correct, its use should be carefully considered, and the reasons for the compromise clearly articulated. Ludwig points out that the phrase is usable in written English, especially when the effectiveness or performance is being traded off for other considerations. The most common contexts for this phrase are in scientific and news publications.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

sacrificing effectiveness

Directly indicates a reduction in how well something works.

reducing effectiveness

Implies a deliberate decrease in effectiveness.

lessening efficacy

A more formal way of saying reducing effectiveness.

impacting effectiveness

Focuses on the effect on the effectiveness, often negatively.

diminishing performance

Highlights the decline in performance levels.

weakening effect

Suggests making something less effective.

diluting impact

Implies that the impact or effect is becoming weaker.

trading off efficacy

Indicates that efficacy is being given up in exchange for something else.

accepting lower efficacy

Clearly states a willingness to have less efficacy.

allowing for reduced efficacy

Similar to accepting lower efficacy, but implies permission or acknowledgement.

FAQs

What does "compromising on efficacy" mean?

It means accepting a reduction in effectiveness or performance in order to gain something else, such as cost savings, convenience, or speed.

When is it appropriate to "compromise on efficacy"?

It may be appropriate when the benefits gained outweigh the reduction in effectiveness, or when achieving perfect efficacy is impractical or too costly. Always carefully weigh the trade-offs.

What are some alternatives to saying "compromising on efficacy"?

You can use alternatives like "sacrificing effectiveness", "reducing effectiveness", or "lessening efficacy" depending on the context.

How can I ensure I'm not overly "compromising on efficacy"?

Set clear minimum performance standards, carefully evaluate the impact of any changes on effectiveness, and prioritize efficacy where it is most critical.