Generalizability Sample Clauses

Generalizability. The generalizability of a clinical trial to actual everyday practice settings is always a concern. FAST-MAG is highly generalizable. It will be performed in the Los Angeles County, a county with the greatest population diversity of any in America, and with wide geographic variation from dense urban core (downtown Los Angeles), to suburban sprawl (San Xxxxxxxx Valley), to rural settings (Playa Vista, Malibu). The trial will be performed at a wide range of hospital sites, from small to large and community to academic. The prehospital components of FAST-MAG are highly generalizable. The prehospital stroke identification instrument employed in FAST-MAG (LAPSS) is now a component of ACLS training for paramedics nationwide. [20] In many prehospital systems, paramedics are already authorized to give magnesium in the field for other conditions and administration of magnesium is a simple variation upon existing protocols for administering drugs in the field employed by all paramedics.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Generalizability. The participants within the current study were a good representation of a young offender population as there was a variety of ages and variation in ethnicity. However, they were all between the ages of 18 and 25 and lived in London boroughs. The London prison population has been noted to be different to other parts of the country due to its cosmopolitan nature (Hurry, Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx & Xxxxxx, 2012) and as such, as is a common limitation in such research, the findings may not be generalizable to younger or older offender populations from other areas of the country and would require replication in different groups.
Generalizability. This study only considered women who were specifi- cally recruited and enrolled because of their diagnosis. It is possible that women who enroll in a study regardless of their diagnoses or medication use would report their medication use with less accuracy. Furthermore, women were primarily non-Hispanic white, had relatively high socio-economic status and older maternal age. The results may not generalize to other populations if accuracy of maternal report or medical record information varies by demographic factors. Women in this study reported medication use in response to open-ended prompts as opposed to a structured query using an exhaustive list of specific medications. Prevalence of medication use according to maternal report and agreement between maternal report and medical records may have been higher had women been queried about specific rheumatoid arthritis and asthma medications. Sources of medica- tion information in records was variable across women and included ordered medication lists, active medication lists, which rely on patient report, and physicians’ notes. Variability in medication reconcilia- tion practice (reconciling discrepancies between patient report and medical record) among individual clinics was unavailable but could contribute to differ- ent levels of medication agreement. Agreement between maternal report and records may be higher in settings where active medication lists are consistently reviewed and reconciled at each visit.
Generalizability. This study utilized only one MPH program in one state and therefore the results may not be applicable or equally reflective of responses that may be gained when implementing this study in other schools, locations, and MPH programs. Further, this study generated a 29% response rate of the targeted second-year RSPH student population. This response rate may be considered less than a desired minimum necessary to achieve statistical significance. Lastly, this study targeted only students who had at least matriculated to second-year status because of their level of exposure to the program. Yet, each of these students may have completed a different number of semesters as well as different courses (i.e., taken classes out of order, completed three versus four semesters, etc.) at the time they responded to the survey and as a result have different perspectives of the curriculum.

Related to Generalizability

  • Scoring The number of routes each company operates (Route # 0001-2999, 8000-8199) will be multiplied by 2 to determine the daily number of trips. (Only accidents, breakdowns and service reports related to routes falling in this range will be used for the evaluation). The daily number of trips will be multiplied by 175 to arrive at the annual number of trips. The number of accidents, breakdowns and service complaints will be divided by the total number of trips to calculate a percent figure. Each company’s percentage will be compared to the total average. See below for a sample. BUS COMPANY NUMBER OF TOTAL BKDN PERCENT ACCIDENTS PERCENT2 SERVICE PERCENT3 ROUTES TRIPS BKDN ACCIDENTS REPORTS COMPLAINTS TO TRIPS TO TRIPS TO TRIPS A 360 58680 3 0.01% 27 0.05% 46 0.08% B 48 7824 3 0.04% 4 0.05% 39 0.50% C 123 20049 11 0.05% 9 0.04% 27 0.13% D 91 14833 0.00% 10 0.07% 11 0.07% E 124 20212 20 0.10% 19 0.09% 18 0.09% TOTALS 746 121598 37 0.03% 69 0.06% 141 0.12% To score, if a company’s percentage is less than or equal to the total percentage for that category, the company will be awarded 6 points per category. Percentages greater than the total percentage for each distinct category (Accident, Breakdown, Service Complaints) will be scored according to the following scale: Less than-Equal to Ave. 6 points 0-3% above average 5 points 4-7% above average 4 points 5-8% above average 3 points 9-12% above average 2 points 13-16% 1 points Greater than 17% 0 points Any circumstance whereby a Breakdown or Accident is found by PTS to be ‘Non Reported’ by vendor within the required timeframe (see G-36) will count as (20) ‘Reported’ instances for the purpose of this Contractor Evaluation Scoring.

  • Constructability Review Prepare detailed interdisciplinary constructability review within Fourteen (14) days of receipt of the plans from the District that: 10.1.2.1.6.1 Ensures construction documents are well coordinated and reviewed for errors; 10.1.2.1.6.2 Identifies to the extent known, construction deficiencies and areas of concern; 10.1.2.1.6.3 Back-checks design drawings for inclusion of modifications; and 10.1.2.1.6.4 Provides the District with written confirmation that: 10.1.2.1.6.4.1 Requirements noted in the design documents prepared for the Project are consistent with and conform to the District's Project requirements and design standards. 10.1.2.1.6.4.2 Various components have been coordinated and are consistent with each other so as to minimize conflicts within or between components of the design documents.

  • Survivability Expiration or termination of the Grant Agreement for any reason does not release Grantee from any liability or obligation set forth in the Grant Agreement that is expressly stated to survive any such expiration or termination, that by its nature would be intended to be applicable following any such expiration or termination, or that is necessary to fulfill the essential purpose of the Grant Agreement, including without limitation the provisions regarding return of grant funds, audit requirements, records retention, public information, warranty, indemnification, confidentiality, and rights and remedies upon termination.

  • Grievability Denial of a petition for reinstatement is grievable. The grievance may not be based on information other than that shared with the Employer at the time of the petition for reinstatement.

  • Audit and Testing 4.1 The Contractor shall conduct tests of the processes and countermeasures contained in the Security Plan ("Security Tests") on an annual basis or as otherwise agreed by the Parties. The date, timing, content and conduct of such Security Tests shall be agreed in advance with the Authority. 4.2 The Authority shall be entitled to send a representative to witness the conduct of the Security Tests. The Contractor shall provide the Authority with the results of such tests (in a form approved by the Authority in advance) as soon as practicable after completion of each Security Test. 4.3 Without prejudice to any other right of audit or access granted to the Authority pursuant to this Contract, the Authority shall be entitled at any time and without giving notice to the Contractor to carry out such tests (including penetration tests) as it may deem necessary in relation to the Security Plan and the Contractor's compliance with and implementation of the Security Plan. The Authority may notify the Contractor of the results of such tests after completion of each such test. Security Tests shall be designed and implemented so as to minimise the impact on the delivery Services. If such tests impact adversely on its ability to deliver the Services to the agreed Service Levels, the Contractor shall be granted relief against any resultant under-performance for the period of the tests. 4.4 Where any Security Test carried out pursuant to paragraphs 4.2 or 4.3 above reveals any actual or potential security failure or weaknesses, the Contractor shall promptly notify the Authority of any changes to the Security Plan (and the implementation thereof) which the Contractor proposes to make in order to correct such failure or weakness. Subject to the Authority's approval in accordance with paragraph 3.12, the Contractor shall implement such changes to the Security Plan in accordance with the timetable agreed with the Authority or, otherwise, as soon as reasonably possible. For the avoidance of doubt, where the change to the Security Plan to address a non-compliance with the Security Policy or security requirements, the change to the Security Plan shall be at no additional cost to the Authority. For the purposes of this paragraph 4, a weakness means a vulnerability in security and a potential security failure means a possible breach of the Security Plan or security requirements.

  • Searchability Offering searchability capabilities on the Directory Services is optional but if offered by the Registry Operator it shall comply with the specification described in this section. 1.10.1 Registry Operator will offer searchability on the web-­‐based Directory Service. 1.10.2 Registry Operator will offer partial match capabilities, at least, on the following fields: domain name, contacts and registrant’s name, and contact and registrant’s postal address, including all the sub-­‐fields described in EPP (e.g., street, city, state or province, etc.). 1.10.3 Registry Operator will offer exact-­‐match capabilities, at least, on the following fields: registrar id, name server name, and name server’s IP address (only applies to IP addresses stored by the registry, i.e., glue records). 1.10.4 Registry Operator will offer Boolean search capabilities supporting, at least, the following logical operators to join a set of search criteria: AND, OR, NOT. 1.10.5 Search results will include domain names matching the search criteria. 1.10.6 Registry Operator will: 1) implement appropriate measures to avoid abuse of this feature (e.g., permitting access only to legitimate authorized users); and 2) ensure the feature is in compliance with any applicable privacy laws or policies.

  • Traceability 11.1 Under the terms of this Agreement, Supplier shall have and operate a process to ensure that all Products, sub-assemblies and the components contained therein supplied to the Buyer are completely Traceable back to manufacturer by batch or lot or date code. 11.2 Further Supplier hereby agrees, unless directed otherwise by the Buyer, to procure components through franchised distributors or direct component Suppliers. Supplier agrees to indemnify and hold the Buyer harmless from and against all costs and expenses for the removal, repair or replacement and reinstallation of counterfeit components incorporated into a Product sold by Supplier to the Buyer where the counterfeit component was procured by Supplier from a person or entity other than a franchised distributor or direct component Supplier or other person or entity pre-approved by the Buyer in writing.

  • Compatibility 1. Any unresolved issue arising from a mutual agreement procedure case otherwise within the scope of the arbitration process provided for in this Article and Articles 25A to 25G shall not be submitted to arbitration if the issue falls within the scope of a case with respect to which an arbitration panel or similar body has previously been set up in accordance with a bilateral or multilateral convention that provides for mandatory binding arbitration of unresolved issues arising from a mutual agreement procedure case. 2. Nothing in this Article and Articles 25A to 25G shall affect the fulfilment of wider obligations with respect to the arbitration of unresolved issues arising in the context of a mutual agreement procedure resulting from other conventions to which the Contracting States are or will become parties.”.

  • Notifications of Outages and Maintenance In the event that a Registry Operator plans maintenance, it will provide notice to the ICANN emergency operations department, at least, twenty-­‐four (24) hours ahead of that maintenance. ICANN’s emergency operations department will note planned maintenance times, and suspend Emergency Escalation services for the monitored services during the expected maintenance outage period. If Registry Operator declares an outage, as per its contractual obligations with ICANN, on services under a service level agreement and performance requirements, it will notify the ICANN emergency operations department. During that declared outage, ICANN’s emergency operations department will note and suspend emergency escalation services for the monitored services involved.

  • Employability Executive acknowledges (i) that Executive has sufficient abilities and talents to be able to obtain, upon the termination of Executive’s employment, comparable employment from another business while fully honoring and complying with the above covenants concerning confidential information and contacts with the Company’s or any of its Affiliates’ customers or employees, and (ii) the importance to the Company and its Affiliates of the above covenants. Accordingly, for a period of one (1) year following the termination of Executive’s employment with the Company and upon the Company’s reasonable request of Executive, Executive shall advise the Company of the identity of Executive’s new employer and shall provide a general description, in reasonable detail, of Executive’s new duties and responsibilities sufficient to inform the Company of its need to request a court order to enforce the above covenants.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!