Sentence examples for scientific adequacy from inspiring English sources

In effect, a new criterion of scientific adequacy was advanced together with the new theory of the universe.

Traditional psychometric methods form the basis for the recent FDA guidelines [ 1, 2, 5] that specify minimum criteria for the scientific adequacy of PRO instruments in clinical trials.

Hence, the evaluation approach assessed both traditional measures of reliability and the scientific adequacy of using patient-incident questions as quality indicators.

This increasingly acknowledged fact has led the United States Food and Drug Administration FDAA) to produce guidelines [ 3, 4] that specify minimum criteria for the scientific adequacy of scales in clinical trials.

The United States Food and Drug Administration FDAareare currently producing guidelines for the scientific adequacy of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical trials, which will have implications for the selection of scales used in future clinical trials.

This is increasingly acknowledged [ 3, 4] and has led the US Food and Drug Administration FDAA) to produce guidelines [ 5] that specify minimum criteria for the scientific adequacy of scales in clinical trials.

The reliability refers to meeting standards of scientific plausibility, technical adequacy about data, methods used, analysis applied and robustness of conclusions.

Many philosophers follow Quine by citing a standard cluster of principles putatively constitutive of scientific standards: empirical adequacy, ontological economy, simplicity, fertility, and so on (Quine 1955, 247; Quine and Ullian 1970, chapter 5).

At the same time, however, standards of adequacy for scientific evidence and inference are applied.

These indices are based on the ACOG recommendations for number of visits for low risk pregnant women; the effectiveness of this standard has not been assessed through rigorous scientific testing, nor has adequacy of care for women with high risk pregnancies been operationalized [ 9].

This suggests that when developing the hypothesis for a learning progression of scientific explanation, the acceptability and adequacy of students need to be given the same, if not more, weight than the correctness or completeness in the philosophy (Berland and McNeill 2012; Braaten and Windschitl 2011).