An additional limitation for interpretation is that for an individual to perceive actions accurately requires that the activity pattern induced by action perception is reliable from trial to trial, whereas traditional group analyses focus on determining whether activity is similar from person to person (averaging across trials at the first level of analysis).
A limitation for interpretation of the device efficacy (cooling rate/hour) is the additional induction of cooling with cold saline and ice bags already in the emergency room [ 15].
As mentioned before a noteworthy limitation for interpretation of the presented outcome data is the fact, that the cardiovascular event and mortality analysis was only based on the AE/SAE reporting.
Both the significance of resistive index variation and doubts related to the reproduction of measurements are major limitations for the interpretation of these results as well as for their recommendation in daily practical clinical use.
Two methodological limitations for the interpretation of these results must be pointed out.
The main limitations for the interpretation of this study are the high rate of dropouts and their sociodemographic characteristics, which ultimately may suggest that they have an increased susceptibility to develop PTSD.
However, here too, and in the extended ORIGIN analysis (9), there were limitations for definitive interpretation as: (i) there is a rapid drop-off after the median 6.2 year follow-up (arguably too short to evaluate the full effect of exposure on cancer risk); (ii) there was interrupted glargine exposure in the intervention arm and (iii) there was considerable contamination across the arms (10, 11).
Additional limitations for results interpretations from this study involve the limited information for bioavailability of rice bran compounds.
There certainly are limitations for such interpretations; the gene could have been lost in some of the descendants of the recipient lineage and additional transfers can complicate the correct identification of donor and recipient lineages.
And the importance of those differences is that if the method for calculating the value added of intermediate inputs exports accounts for direct and indirect exports, this could imply a limitation for the interpretation of the advantages derived from NAFTA for each of its members.
