Part, Chapter, Paragraph
1 I, 2. 5 | informed choices. Work on the methodology for comparative analysis
2 II, 5. 1. 1| Differences exist in the methodology adopted for data collection (
3 II, 5. 2. 2| through the same standardized methodology, therefore they are comparable
4 II, 5. 2. 2| through the same standardized methodology, therefore they are comparable
5 II, 5. 2. 2| differences among countries in the methodology adopted for data collection (
6 II, 5. 2. 3| through the same standardized methodology within the WHO MONICA Project.
7 II, 5. 2. 4| differences in data collection methodology (self reported or measured),
8 II, 5. 5. 1| population using a sound methodology and repeated at regular
9 II, 5. 5. 2| be classified by research methodology, disease type, age range,
10 II, 5. 5. 3| prevalence over time. The methodology to measure prevalence and
11 II, 5. 5. 3| ascertainment and survey methodology in the same time frame.
12 II, 5. 5. 3| better accuracy in survey methodology, and where assessments have
13 II, 5. 5. 3| ascertainment and survey methodology in time.~When multiple regression
14 II, 5. 5. 3| consequence of differences in methodology, population samples, survey
15 II, 5. 5. 3| studies, differences in methodology have a considerable influence
16 II, 5. 5. 3| results due to differences in methodology.~Our estimates show the
17 II, 5. 5. 3| Italy: comparison of tracer methodology and clinical ascertainment
18 II, 5. 7. 2| analysed using exactly the same methodology.~ ~The ERA-EDTA Registry (
19 II, 5. 10. 2| rather than gold standard methodology (i.e food challenge studies
20 II, 5. 10. 7| Review of the development of methodology for evaluating the human
21 II, 5. 11. 7| in Leicester: a study of methodology and examination of possible
22 II, 5. 14. 2| weaknesses in terms of methodology, quality control, and presentation
23 II, 6. 3. 2| resistance patterns is that the methodology for sensitivity testing
24 II, 7. 2 | e.g. – and with a specific methodology. This may lead to problems
25 II, 7. 2. 4| gathered on the basis of a methodology developed in 1990. The data
26 II, 7. 2. 4| EU 15) and Norway. The methodology is being implemented in
27 II, 7. 5 | the outlines of a common methodology for injury information based
28 II, 9. 3. 1| to enhancing statistical methodology and classifications and
29 II, 9. 3. 2| to include and a common methodology for identifying cases. The
30 II, 9. 5. 4| include gender proofing methodology and classifications;~· The
31 II, 9. 5. 4| to be paid to statistical methodology and classifications. It
32 III, 10. 2. 1| well described sources and methodology.~ ~The estimated data for
33 III, 10. 2. 1| probably more a matter of methodology than of real differences
34 III, 10. 2. 1| regarding data collection methodology and age range of the subjects.
35 III, 10. 4. 1| and Environment Integrated Methodology and Toolbox~INTARESE~Integrated
36 III, 10. 4. 1| billion, depending on the methodology used to assess the value
37 III, 10. 4. 2| EU to harmonise testing methodology for contaminants. Regulation
38 III, 10. 4. 2| reasons related to sampling, methodology and uneven distribution
39 III, 10. 4. 2| harmonisation of the analytical methodology.~· Listeriosis is an important
40 III, 10. 4. 2| and on http ~ ~An ad hoc methodology to assess the risk of carcinogenic
41 III, 10. 4. 2| further work to develop a methodology to take into account the
42 III, 10. 4. 2| safety assessment using the methodology further developed in the
43 III, 10. 4. 5| robust, although analytical methodology has not been fully developed
44 III, 10. 6. 1| intervals using a common methodology in order to monitor how
45 III, 10. 6. 1| and Retirement in Europe – Methodology. Mannheim: Mannheim Research
46 IV, 11. 1. 6| Europe. A review of the methodology used to develop DRG systems
47 IV, 11. 2. 2| Clinical Excellence. The methodology used for making decisions
48 IV, 11. 5. 5| transplantation, the evaluation methodology and fundamental research.~-
49 IV, 11. 5. 5| protocols, Registry, implement methodology, deliver information, support
50 IV, 12. 5 | historical and future data methodology and accuracy and harmonization
51 IV, 12. 7 | care has been developing a methodology for estimating the impact
52 IV, 13.Acr | Clinical Excellence. The methodology used for making decisions
