'methodological conditions' is a correct and usable phrase in written English.
You can use it to describe a set of circumstances that must be met in order to achieve a successful outcome. For example, "With the right methodological conditions in place, the experiment should yield reliable results."
Moderator analyses confirm that these weak effects are generally consistent (and often non-significant) across a variety of methodological conditions (e.g., different outcome measures, different kinds of samples).
This work is still in its early stages and this position article aims to present a reflection on the technical and methodological conditions to be met so as to conduct successfully this research.
This paper addresses the methodological conditions –particularly experimental design and statistical inference– ensuring the identifiability of sorption parameters from breakthrough curves measured during stirred flow-through reactor experiments also known as continuous flow stirred-tank reactor (CSTR) experiments.
Here, we present a review of (i) the advantages and limitations of the use of field plots to measure soil erosion; and (ii) the potential sources of variation in the results obtained due to a lack of harmony between methodological conditions and the processes operating in the environment at different scales.
By contrast, in a previous study [17], performed under identical methodological conditions, we found that the frequency of FOXP3 positive T cells in normal skin and a panel of inflammatory skin diseases was in the range of 25 30%, which is significantly higher compared to the situation in atherosclerotic intima and adventitia.
Despite these interesting findings, variations in methodological conditions (microarray platforms, heterogeneous cellular populations, etc).
AB was the second reviewer for the level of evidence, methodological quality, conditions tested, and measurement methods stages of this review.
ES undertook the literature search, and reviewed the level of evidence, methodological quality, conditions tested, and measurement methods of each of the sourced papers.
These, however, are used frequently in neurodegenerative disease and it is therefore necessary to be aware of the methodological boundary conditions for calculation of effect sizes for additive scales.
To explain possible moderation of the variability of the overall effect sizes, we examined the relation between sample, methodological, or condition characteristics and magnitude of effect using a modified weighted least squares bivariate regression analyses with weights equivalent to the inverse of the variance for each effect size.
There were slight discrepancies with a previous publication referring to some of these lines [19], with a greater degree of S100 staining in UW479, and less GFAP in Res259 in our study, however it unclear whether this is reflective of methodological differences, culture conditions or changes in gene expression over time.
