narrow evidence

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "narrow evidence" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe evidence that is limited in scope or not comprehensive enough to support a broad conclusion. Example: "The study's findings were based on narrow evidence, making it difficult to generalize the results to a larger population."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

4 human-written examples

Past research on self-critical perfectionism and depressive symptoms has used either undergraduate or psychiatric samples, suggesting a need to broaden this relatively narrow evidence base.

Personality and Individual Differences

This article examines the controversy surrounding these guidelines using the 2013 cholesterol guidelines as a case study of broader trends in clinical guidelines to use a narrow evidence base, expand the boundaries of disease and overemphasize pharmaceutical treatment.

Health Policy

Here, people who love horse racing love, admire, and care for their equine heroes equally as fervently -- a notion difficult to gauge for the non-racing public given the narrow evidence on offer.

Huffington Post

While ultrasound may have a role as an add-on test in ARF when the chest X-ray is negative for consolidation, this possibility is tempered by the narrow evidence base available associated with substantial risks of bias and applicability concerns.

BMJ Open

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

55 human-written examples

However, we are also concerned that this new initiative is too narrow, advocates evidence without the theoretical frameworks to understand it, and may simply replace one orthodoxy with another.

The Guardian

The standards for inclusion should be appropriately narrow, the evidence relied upon credible and genuine, and the redress and review procedures consistent with basic constitutional requirements of fairness and due process.

The Guardian - Opinion

The QRS was narrow without evidence of bundle branch block, and there was no sign of QT prolongation.

JA Clinical Reports

Studies such as these and the one described in this paper help to narrow the evidence gap on the effectiveness of community participation to contribute to changes in health status.

BMC Public Health

A limitation of the economic analysis was the narrow clinical evidence base: the source trial of effectiveness data (Mawhood and Howlin, 1999) had a small sample size (N = 50); moreover, its quasi-experimental design may have introduced bias in the analysis due to confounding factors (Morgan et al., 2000).

Autism

According to a new study, consumers now believe that the gap between Web prices and those of traditional stores has narrowed, despite evidence that many goods remain significantly cheaper when bought online.

The New York Times

James Barlow, chair in technology and innovation management at Imperial College, who was involved in the WSD programme, delighted me by saying at the forum that: "I just don't think you can really evaluate something like that [the WSD] using narrow conventional evidence-based methodologies.

The Guardian

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "narrow evidence", clarify what specific limitations exist in the evidence, such as sample size, scope, or methodology, to enhance transparency and credibility.

Common error

Avoid making broad generalizations based solely on "narrow evidence". Acknowledge the limitations and suggest further research or analysis is needed before drawing definitive conclusions.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "narrow evidence" functions as an adjective-noun combination, where "narrow" modifies "evidence". It indicates that the supporting information is limited, specific, or not comprehensive. As Ludwig AI points out, the phrase is correct and usable in written English, describing evidence limited in scope.

Expression frequency: Rare

Frequent in

Science

40%

News & Media

40%

Formal & Business

0%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "narrow evidence" is a grammatically sound and usable term, though Ludwig indicates it's relatively rare. It describes evidence that is limited in scope or not comprehensive enough to fully support a broad claim. This phrase is most commonly found in scientific and news contexts. When using "narrow evidence", it's important to acknowledge its limitations and avoid overstating conclusions. Alternative phrases like "limited evidence" or "scant evidence" can be used to convey a similar meaning.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

limited evidence

Emphasizes the quantity or extent of the evidence.

scant evidence

Highlights the insufficiency or lack of evidence.

meager evidence

Stresses the poor quality or inadequacy of the evidence.

circumstantial evidence

Focuses on the indirect nature of the evidence.

selective evidence

Highlights that only certain pieces of evidence are being considered.

specific evidence

Focuses on precise and particular proof.

isolated evidence

Emphasizes that the evidence stands alone without further corroboration.

restricted evidence

Highlights that the evidence is limited or not widely available.

fragmentary evidence

Highlights that the evidence is incomplete or in pieces.

tenuous evidence

Emphasizes the weakness or fragility of the evidence.

FAQs

What does "narrow evidence" mean in research?

"Narrow evidence" refers to supporting data that is limited in scope, sample size, or applicability, making it difficult to draw broad conclusions. It suggests the need for more comprehensive data or further investigation.

How can I address the issue of "narrow evidence" in my research?

Acknowledge the limitations of your evidence, explain why the evidence is narrow (e.g., limited sample size), and suggest avenues for future research to broaden the evidence base.

What are some alternatives to "narrow evidence"?

You can use alternatives like "limited evidence", "scant evidence", or "specific evidence" depending on the context.

Is it acceptable to draw conclusions based on "narrow evidence"?

Drawing strong conclusions based solely on "narrow evidence" is generally discouraged. It is better to present findings cautiously, acknowledging the limitations, and frame the results as preliminary or suggestive rather than definitive.