developed for review

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "developed for review" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when referring to something that has been created or prepared for the purpose of being evaluated or assessed. Example: "The document was developed for review by the committee before the final decision is made."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

5 human-written examples

Indeed, several strategies based on either pharmacological treatments with okadaic acid and Hydroxy-nonenal [10] or overexpression of Tau bearing FTDP-17 mutations have been developed (for review [11]).

Plosone

More recently several approaches that allow substitution rates to vary over the tree have been developed (for review see [ 8]).

BMC Evolutionary Biology

To fully exploit the advantages offered by parthenocarpy, several methods to genetically engineer parthenocarpic plants have been developed (for review, see [ 1, 2]).

BMC Biotechnology

Several methods for sequence alignment and gene expression quantification of RNA-Seq data have been developed (for review see [ 22]) including the Tuxedo Suite [ 23], RSeqTools [ 24], and RSEM [ 25].

BMC Genomics

Manipulation of BACs using traditional cloning procedures can be difficult (e.g. because of a lack of convenient restriction enzyme sites) and thus a range of methodologies that apply bacterial genetics, including homologous recombination (e.g. Red/ET homologous recombineering) within the E. coli host, have been developed (for review, see [ 21]).

BMC Genomics

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

55 human-written examples

The Deeks test that is especially developed for reviews of diagnostic accuracy was only used in 12 reviews (10.5%).

BMC Medical Research Methodology

In rodents, microCT, high-field MRI, and an array of contrast, luminescent and fluorescent bio-imaging methods have been developed (for reviews, see [ 95– 95]).

Arthritis Research and Therapy

There was no standard tool for appraising quantitative descriptive observational studies; therefore, one was adapted for this review from the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology statement 80 and other published tools developed for reviewing epidemiological studies 81, 82.

Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews

We will conduct a systematic review that is informed by Cochrane procedures, as well as guidelines developed for reviews that are specifically intended to inform policy and programme decision-making.

BMJ Open

As an alternative to estimating Ne from demographic data, methods for estimating Ne from genetic data have been developed (for reviews, see Waples 1991; Schwartz et al. 1999; Beaumont 2003; Leberg 2005; Wang 2005).

Evolutionary Applications

Data from the included studies were extracted by the main review author, and synthesised into a database developed for the review.

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "developed for review", clearly specify the purpose and scope of the review. This provides context and ensures the review process is focused and effective.

Common error

Avoid using "developed for review" without clearly defining the criteria and audience for the review. An undefined scope can lead to unfocused and ineffective feedback.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "developed for review" acts as a passive verb phrase followed by a prepositional phrase, modifying a noun. It indicates that something has been created with the specific intention of being examined or assessed. Ludwig AI confirms its correct usage within scientific literature.

Expression frequency: Rare

Frequent in

Science

100%

Less common in

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Academia

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "developed for review" is grammatically sound and primarily used within scientific and academic contexts to denote that something has been created specifically for examination and assessment. According to Ludwig, it is considered correct. While its frequency is relatively rare, its usage is clear and purposeful. Alternatives like "created for assessment" or "prepared for evaluation" offer similar meanings. When using this phrase, it is important to clearly define the scope and criteria of the review to ensure effective and focused feedback.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

Created for assessment

Focuses on the act of creating something specifically to be assessed.

Prepared for evaluation

Emphasizes the preparation aspect, highlighting that something is ready for evaluation.

Designed for scrutiny

Highlights the design aspect, with the explicit intention of being scrutinized.

Adapted for inspection

Stresses the adaptation of something for the purpose of inspection.

Formulated for analysis

Suggests a careful and methodical formulation process, specifically for analysis.

Constructed for examination

Emphasizes the building or construction of something for the purpose of examination.

Tailored for appraisal

Highlights the customized nature of something created for appraisal.

Intended for revision

Suggests that the primary purpose of the creation is to be revised after review.

Composed for feedback

Focuses on the aspect of getting feedback on something that was composed.

Drafted for critique

Emphasizes the draft nature of something created to undergo critique.

FAQs

How can I use "developed for review" in a sentence?

You can use "developed for review" to indicate that something was specifically created to be examined and assessed, as in "The protocol was developed for review by the ethics committee".

What are some alternatives to "developed for review"?

Some alternatives include "created for assessment", "prepared for evaluation", or "designed for scrutiny", depending on the specific context and nuance you wish to convey.

Is there a difference between "developed for review" and "developed for reviewing"?

"Developed for review" suggests a static item intended for a single review process, while "developed for reviewing" might imply an ongoing or iterative review process.

What kind of documents are typically "developed for review"?

Documents such as research protocols, data extraction forms, and standardized questionnaires are often "developed for review" to ensure their accuracy, validity, and appropriateness before implementation.