Sentence examples for problematic analyses from inspiring English sources

Some ecological and cohort studies are limited by confounding and problematic analyses, including uncertain statistical adjustments.

The time-series from these problematic analyses were scaled down by a factor of 2 to suppress high amplitude 'spikes'spikes

Further, most of the examples of problematic analyses cited in critiques of phylogenetic dating [ 72, 73] are of papers which used either clock rates, or fossils or palaeogeographical events, but not all three sources (as in the present study).

Although the phylogenetic status of Ellobiidae remains problematic, analyses based on concatenated mitochondrial AA sequences and those based on individual genes (18S, 28S, 16S, COI) all agree that the false limpet Trimusculus reticulatus is closely related to ellobiids [ 2- 5].

A key weakness is problematic statistical analyses.

Many of the developmental neurotoxicity studies suffer from inadequate study design, problematic statistical analyses, use of formulated products, and/or inadequate controls.

For example, chloroplast third positions are problematic in analyses across all of algal/plant evolution (e.g., [ 81]), and even appear to be problematic at the relatively shallow level of seed plant phylogeny [ 35, 73, 82].

Retention of all of these species in the LTT analysis should not be problematic because analyses that pruned these species (results not shown) did not differ substantially from those we present.

All of these approaches require overnight digestion, a procedure that can be problematic for analyses of such small volumes on-tissue surfaces where evaporation and delocalization of the solvent can stop the digestion prematurely.

It should also be noted that ancient DNA samples are often scattered across time and therefore samples from several time points are sometimes combined (due to insufficient samples at each single time point) to represent one time period, which may be problematic for analyses.

A limitation of this study was the relatively high rate of loss to follow-up in the intervention group, which was problematic when analysing the results.