"integration of studies" is correct and usable in written English.
It refers to the process of combining different subjects or disciplines in one's studies. Example: The university encourages students to pursue interdisciplinary courses to promote the integration of studies and provide a well-rounded education.
Formal integration of studies including pet dogs with cancer is becoming a more common component of an innovative cancer drug development process.
Historically, the political border between Tunisia and Libya hindered the integration of studies over its entirety, which led to the establishment of separate litho-biostratigraphic frameworks.
Improved integration of studies.
Moreover, the inclusion of data from the studies of newer TNFα inhibitors, including certolizumab and golimumab, 14 46 62 ensured the integration of studies performed at the same time period as these other trials.
Finally, modifying the approach to allow the integration of studies performed in populations of different origins or using different genotyping platforms would allow the comparison of a larger number of diseases.
However, the successful identification of biomarkers and/or mechanisms of tolerance that have implications on long-term graft survival and outcomes depend on proper integration of study design, experimental protocols, and data-driven hypotheses.
Integration of study results may be greatly facilitated by using similar outcomes measured by compatible instruments that are comparable across various studies.
A study reference group of key health industry stakeholders will be established to encourage integration of study findings into policy and practice, and results will guide the development of community interventions.
The lack of validated criteria for defining and assessing IEI-EMF affects the quality of the relevant research, hindering not only the comparison or integration of study findings, but also the identification and management of patients by health care providers.
Despite this, integration of study quality into the conclusions and recommendations was undertaken in less than half of all reviews and even when quality was assessed in many cases it was evaluated as poor.
The most common methodological problems were failure to report conflicts of interest, lack of integration of study quality into the conclusions of the review, exclusion of studies based on their publication status, not providing a list of included or excluded studies and not assessing the likelihood of publication bias.
