However, methodological differences make comparison of results across trials challenging.
However, though these results do give insight into the role of a specific neuropeptide in regulating FAA, differences between model organisms, strain backgrounds, activity measurements, and other methodological differences make direct comparisons between these strains difficult.
Methodological differences make comparisons difficult [ 10].
Such methodological differences make comparisons difficult [3].
Unfortunately methodological differences make direct comparison with other costing studies challenging.
Most of the studies support the use of targeted screening; however, methodological differences make it difficult to draw conclusions from these data [16,17,19 26].
These methodological differences make it difficult to directly compare their results (i.e. differences in species, duration of I/R, duration of exercise, measurement of injury, the timing of the administration of antioxidants, and in vivo versus ex vivo experiments).
Numerous methodological differences make comparisons difficult between trials, however, it should be noted that the reduction in HbA1c in this study was greater than in the exenatide plus insulin observational and clinical practice trials while the reduction in weight was more modest than in most of those trials.
However, our review also makes clear that even though we specified our search terms by means of a specific environmental factor and outcome most studies have large methodological differences, which makes it difficult to make cross-study comparisons of findings.
The discrepancies might be due to methodological differences, which make it difficult to compare gait analysis results across studies (Fuentes et al., 2011, Zabala et al., 2015).
