Part, Chapter, Paragraph
1 II, 5. 2. 2 | paucity, weak quality and comparability of data available on CVD
2 II, 5. 2. 6 | pose new challenges for the comparability of disease indicators. All
3 II, 5. 4. 2 | accuracy and reciprocal comparability seems still relatively limited.~
4 II, 5. 4. 2 | last point, the issue of comparability becomes an obvious limitation
5 II, 5. 4. 2 | representativeness of data and other comparability issues.~More recently, an
6 II, 5. 4. 2 | which poses issues of comparability of the results.~ ~
7 II, 5. 4. 6 | they should be realistic), comparability (they should be comparable
8 II, 5. 4. 6 | made it clear that the comparability of national indicators is
9 II, 5. 4. 6 | Examining and strengthening the comparability of diabetes epidemiological
10 II, 5. 5. 1 | problems in European-wide comparability and quality of mental health
11 II, 5. 5. 1 | register data. Problems include comparability and validity of prevalence
12 II, 5. 5. 1 | described above, international comparability of these data is heavily
13 II, 5. 5. 3 | methodologies would increase the comparability and the usefulness of epidemiological
14 II, 6. 3. 1 | consequential effect on the comparability of incidence data) not to
15 II, 6. 4. 2 | IT tool.~To increase the comparability of the data from the different
16 II, 7. 2. 1 | However, important quality and comparability issues remain (e.g. common
17 II, 7. 3. 2 | high level of international comparability. Every two minutes someone
18 II, 7. 3. 4 | system and problems with comparability of the national figures
19 II, 9. 1. 2 | has greatly improved data comparability between countries. A standard
20 II, 9. 2. 2 | currently difficulties over the comparability of nationally-originating
21 II, 9. 3. 1 | difficulties around the comparability of data, as European boundaries
22 II, 9. 3. 3 | and content. This lack of comparability enabled only limited cross-national
23 III, 10. 2. 1 | warning that “international comparability is limited due to the lack
24 III, 10. 2. 1 | hours spent sitting).~ ~b) Comparability of data sources~As outlined
25 III, 10. 3. 1 | reported data is the degree of comparability. International comparisons
26 III, 10. 4. 2 | Groups. These cover the comparability of the FOCUS groundwater
27 III, 10. 6. 3 | victimisation. In order to maintain comparability with the results of previous
28 IV, 11. 1. 2(1)| In an effort to improve comparability of health statistics and
29 IV, 12. 5 | shortcomings with regard to comparability between Member States/Candidate
30 IV, 12. 5 | of data and information, comparability issues, exchange of data
31 IV, 13. 5 | limitations, namely lack of data comparability. Age-related mental illnesses,
