Sentence examples for interventions are compared from inspiring English sources

In contrast to direct within-trial comparison, in indirect comparisons, the effects of interventions are compared to each other by their performance against a common comparator.

We exclude one-off intervention start-up costs (e.g. for research and development of intervention materials) so that cost-effectiveness of interventions are compared as if running in 'steady-state'.

In this way, both interventions are compared to the broad range of routine clinical care, enabling generalizability.

The underlying conditions and characteristics of the populations included before and after the interventions are compared in Table  1.

This is not in accordance with WHO's generalised cost-effectiveness approach where interventions are compared to a null scenario [ 55].

In a simple meta analysis only two interventions are compared; evidence of a number of trials is combined to get an overall estimate for the difference in effect.

These interventions were compared with studies using no treatment, waiting list, or usual care comparators.

Both interventions were compared to an information-only control designed to educate employees about how and why to conserve energy.

Three active CBM treatment interventions were compared (group therapy, individual therapy, and summer camp) to an "advice in one session".

The cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) in ACCORD will provide information about the relative economic efficiency of the different interventions being compared in the trial.

A variety of interventions were compared indirectly.