Sentence examples for measuring methodological from inspiring English sources

It is arguable that reporting items have no place in instruments measuring methodological quality however, despite increased sensitisation to issues related to the quality of reporting, diagnostic research remains poorly reported [45] and evaluating methodological quality relies on transparent and good quality reporting.

There are no accepted criteria for measuring methodological quality in prognostic studies and so this form was a modified version of the form created by de Bock et al (2004), derived from the work by Altman and Lyman (1998) and Laupacis et al (1994).

The 11 item PEDro scale was developed by Verhagen et al using the Delphi consensus technique to develop a list of criteria thought by experts in the field to measure methodological quality [ 48].

This tool consists of 11 items and has good face and content validity for measuring the methodological quality of systematic reviews (Shea et al, 2007).

It is claimed to have good face and content validity for measuring the methodological quality of SRs that include only RCTs [ 1].

The tool consists of 11 items and has good face and content validity for measuring the methodological quality of systematic reviews.

Taken together, to achieve consistent and replicable patterns of the relationship between emotion and neuroimaging measures, methodological aspects associated with the various neuroimaging techniques may be of similar importance as the definition of emotional cues and task context used to study emotion.

Globally, discrepancies between our results and what is found in the literature might be partly explained by study population differences, different definitions of covariates and NVP measures, methodological designs, possibility of type I and type II errors, and confounding factors considered in the statistical analysis.

Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies QUADASS) is a new tool to measure the methodological quality of diagnostic accuracy studies in systematic reviews.

However, different paradigms were used to measure crowding (methodological heterogeneity) and therefore results were presented in a narrative way.

First, we did not measure RCT methodological quality directly, as we did not verify the information from the authors or their protocols.