Sentence examples for more robust comparisons from inspiring English sources

It is suggested that the framework can be used (and evolved) by other ecodesign researchers when developing surveys or questions for in-depth case study interviews as this will facilitate more robust comparisons between studies and support the development of a more consolidated body of knowledge in this field.

But, for future analyses, it would be highly desirable to have more detailed treatment data sets that included information on these factors to enable more robust comparisons.

The highly parallel nature of the EE and TAM study designs and subsequent analyses facilitated more robust comparisons, thus increasing confidence in the identification of conserved uterine responses between species and ligands.

In particular, stance time imbalance, vertical impulse, and peak vertical force yielded more robust comparisons of the affected and contralateral limb than weight-bearing, as measured by an incapacitance meter.

Although clusters implementing the Pilot Programme were not selected randomly, due to the operational requirements of starting a pilot, scale-up in 2014 includes random assignment of clusters to generate more robust comparisons.

A better comparison would probably be if patients with early RA who are MTX-naive were compared, as these patients would be more likely to be similar in their previous RA treatment and hence lead to more robust comparisons.

This decision was taken on the basis of feedback from several representatives at the 2015 Dagstuhl seminar in Computational Metabolomics [51], to allow a statistically more robust comparison of the methods.

While avoiding the potential aggregation bias of subgroup analysis and allowing a more robust comparison of intervention characteristics, these trials are unfortunately limited by short follow-up periods and generally report only on risk factors or biological parameters, making it difficult to assess their impact on the long-term clinical outcomes observed in our analysis.

The symmetry of the conservation track allows for a much more robust comparison between species.

In our study, use of both examination techniques was an eligibility criterion that provided a more robust comparison.

These reference rates provide a more robust comparison than IRR incidences found in the available literature, which are limited by small or dissimilar patient populations.