Suggestions(1)
Exact(2)
Furthermore, more than half found it problematic to assess patients' work capacity (57.8 %) and to make a long-term prognosis about future work capacity of patients (55.7 %).
A significantly higher percentage of the GPs (48.4%) also stated it very problematic to provide a long-term prognosis about future work capacity of patients on sick leave compared with the other physicians.
Similar(58)
He offered a bleak prognosis about his future as a pitcher.
More than half (55.7 %) also found it very or fairly problematic to provide a long-term prognosis about patients' future work capacity.
At a more detailed level, more than half of the physicians found it problematic to assess patients' work capacity (59%%) and to make a long-term prognosis about patients' future work capacity (56%%).
Issues that rated highest as very or fairly problematic concerned providing a long-term prognosis about the future work capacity (68.5%) and assessment of a patient's work capacity (57.4%).
More than half of the responders found it very or fairly problematic to assess patients' work capacity (57.8 %), to make a long-term prognosis about patients' future work capacity (55.7%%), and to handle long-term or very long-term sickness certifications (51.9 % and 51.8 %).
Thus, probable explanations and prognoses about the future are impossible and critical rationalism cannot be a valid guiding principle for exposing the future in a scientific way.
First, probable prognoses about the future are ideological claims rather than scientific statements.
Following that, and having in mind that prognoses about the future are much more uncertain than about the past, the role of critical discourse in a SEF is fundamental.
The inconsiderate use of (multiple) prognoses about the future – although sometimes explicitly stating the overall caveat of ceteris paribus or rebus sic stantibus – is a root-cause of a strong and, especially in the case of scenarios camouflaged as multiple prognoses, very convincing illusion of knowledge.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com