Other studies concerning bone tumours have shown that the professional delay and therefore the overall symptom interval was significantly extended when patients contacted a general practitioner first in comparison to accident or emergency departments, influenced by a later x-ray examination [ 6].
Addressing the limitations of the existing approaches, the present research introduces a new hybrid predictive model (integrating C4.5 and PRISM learners) for diagnosing effectively the diseases (instead of any specific disease) in comprehensible way by the practitioners with better prediction results in comparison to the traditional approaches.
In comparison to practitioners in the second phase of the study, LIR detected the need for resuscitation earlier and was more consistent in management.
Since multiple chronic diseases are positively impacted by the intervention, the added cost of the Prevention Practitioner intervention is likely small in comparison to the long-term costs of managing these chronic diseases.
In comparison to CAM practitioners, the dose of vitamin C administered was very low (1 gram or less).
The percentage of prescriptions written by nurses in primary care in England is very small in comparison to general practitioners and there has been little change in that over five years.
Public hospital services, for example, are generally costed at a lower rate in comparison to private practitioner fees [ 18, 20].
Certainly both rural and urban Australian general practitioners have significantly higher mean levels of persistence in comparison to population norms [ 18, 19].
Surveys of nurse practitioners in the United States of America report over 90% regularly using their authority to prescribe [ 32, 33], in comparison to a survey of Australian nurse practitioners with endorsement to prescribe, which found that 41% did not prescribe [ 34].
This difference related to the statement concerning the principle of optimisation, whereby 95%% of radiographers correctly recognised that consideration of radiation dose is an important aspect of optimisation in comparison to the 75%% of radiology practitioners.
The mean total score after the course was significantly higher for the non-specialized physicians in comparison to that of the general practitioners (t=-2.688 t=-2.68819, p < 0.05).
