The assessment instruments used for psychosocial adjustment enabled us to compare subgroups of patients, regarding demographic, clinical and psychosocial variables.
The use of young rats enabled us to compare results with previous observations in the STZ model [ 81].
In addition we were able to use a dataset which enabled us to compare hospitals which were confronted with transparency early on with hospitals which were not.
The method of using subsets of several main differential diagnoses enabled us to compare more similar groups of patients.
This approach enabled us to compare simulated gene expression configurations when using GRNs that differed from those reported before.
We chose to standardize stress with respect to survival, an approach few comparative studies have attempted, which enabled us to compare the molecular level effects of different stressors.
These data enabled us to compare the performances of POPS to other programs using spatial covariates [42] [44].
This enabled us to compare quality of life effects of different treatments in men more comparable at baseline than in previous studies.
Moreover, the BCR-ABL mouse ALL model enabled us to compare the efficacy of CY with several other commonly used anticancer drugs.
This enabled us to compare the conditions directly (within participants) in an inferential statistical analysis using paired t-tests.
This study design enabled us to compare the performance AU with that of the MU, which is used in the wards of our hospital today.
