The limitations of perceptual speech evaluation by experts are seen when the results of the different experts, given in Table 3, are compared to each other.
Thus, ordering of the experts presented in Table 1 is alphabetical and does not correspond to the ordering of results.
The core CCRE Aphasia Rehabilitation working group then translated the evidence into a list of BPS and additional input was sought from researchers who had specific expertise in each of the areas of care (see additional experts listed in table 1).
Only two projects explicitly stated the background of the experts in a table [ 16, 66].
The expert scoring in Table 3 shows the pairwise comparison among the selected energy efficiency indices.
Profiles of the experts are shown in Table 3. Experts were classified according to the different categories of criteria as follows: 18 for EP, 16 for PC, 14 for EC, 10 for PH, and 13 for SO.
A decision-tree model developed with experts in round-table discussions benefits from a systematic and transparent approach and the multidisciplinary contributions of the experts.
In this paper we showed that a decision-tree structure developed with experts in round-table discussions is descriptively valid in reflecting reality.
Further information of the six experts is shown in Table 2.
Hence, some new metrics were added according to experts' ideas mentioned in Table 2.
