Limitations and Recommendations. Although we contained reasonable number of variables in our multivariable logistic regression model based on 81 records (analyzed in Part 3.4), small sample size was still a problem for our study. For independent variables, Depression, Education, Employment and Homelessness, each one had two categories. And there were a total of 16 (24) subgroups in our samples. In average, there were only 5 samples in each subgroup. Therefore, it was hard for each subgroup to represent their corresponding population. To increase accuracy of results, more participants should be involved into our study in the future. Since the sample size limited the numbers of independent variables, there is still likely some residual confounding to our study. Based on our sample size, we could only add 4 confounders in our logistic regression model, while there are some other factors that would be associated with adherence, such as social capital (Mukoswa, Charalambous, & Xxxxxx, 2017) and so on. In our study, we measured social capital related factors while our sample size prohibit us from adding it into our model. Moreover, sample size would also affect significance of results. For example, the odds of missing a least one appointment is 1.07 (95% CI= (1.00, 1.16), p=0.0639) times higher per 1 point increase in Social Stigma Scale. Although it was not significant in our study, it may be significant in the further studies if we could recruit more participants in the future. Therefore, more participants should be recruited to our study to solve residual confounding and significant problem in the future. There was a kind of selection bias in our study. The participants were recruited directly from the clinic medical appointments, making it easier to include those who were more likely to engage in appointment adherence. YBMSM HIV patients who never had any appointment would be excluded from our study. Moreover, all participants were recruited in one clinical site, which would exclude YBMSM who have appointments in other clinics in Atlanta. To solve these limitation, a variety of recruitment methods should be considered in future studies, such as recruiting directly from community and sharing related data with other clinics in Atlanta. Finally, information bias was also a kind of limitation to our study. The prevalence of depression in our sample was high, even compared with other studies of youth living with HIV(Xxxxx, Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx, & Xxxxxx, 2015). The depression was assessed b...

Limitations and Recommendations. A limitation of the study is the generally high parental educational levels. Although the percentage of highly educated parents is not different from other studies about gender stereotypes in a family context (e.g., XxXxxx et al., 1999) it reduces the generalizability of the results, especially because educational level appears to have an effect on gender stereotypes. However, in the current study educational level was only related to explicit gender stereotypes. A second limitation lies in the scoring of the AIP for young children. Because some children were not able to push the buttons, but only pointed to the pictures (with the experimenter pushing the corresponding button for them), we could not use the response latency scoring system of the Xxxxx et al. (2010) study. Instead we used a difference score for the accuracy in the congruent and incongruent blocks. However, we are confident that we assessed automatic/implicit responding instead of gender flexibility, because the children were under time pressure and trials with long response latencies were excluded. For older children, who can push the buttons, we recommend the additional use of the response latency score, because it is similar to the scoring of the more widely used Implicit Association Measure. If the associations between the two methods are promising, the age range of the AIP may be expanded. Another limitation is that we did not use an explicit attitude measure for children. The inclusion of an explicit measure would have given a more complete picture of the prediction of children’s gender stereotypes from parental attitudes. Future studies should explore the associations between explicit attitudes of parents and explicit stereotypes of their children, as well as the association between explicit and implicit attitudes of the children and the possible cross-associations between explicit and implicit parent and child attitudes. Many studies about gender role socialization and gender stereotype development have been conducted in the 80s and 90s. Given the rapid changes in society regarding gender roles in the past decades it is important to conduct studies like the current study. Many mothers in the current study already had mothers that worked outside the home, and they themselves have careers more often than not. It is imperative to examine changes in the attitudes of parents about gender and how these attitudes relate to the family context. Because the present study showed that gender ste...

Limitations and Recommendations. While the information collected in my interviews does in fact highlight the difficulty low- income individual’s face in affording healthy foods, these findings are from a small pool of people in a segmented population; low-income adults enrolled in the FVRx pilot program at Xxxxx Hospital. The 18 participants I spoke with are not reflective of all low-income patients suffering from diet-related illnesses, meaning that we cannot generalize these findings. However, because the purpose of this study was to specifically obtain more in-depth information from this particular population, we can use these snapshots of information to map out common themes and barriers related to healthy eating. One limitation of the FVRx program is that once the six months are over, participants no longer receive the vouchers, and are on their own to obtain fresh, healthy food. This is a common problem in behavior change interventions, where adherence to a new behavior will often decline as the intervention is reduced or withdrawn (Xxxxxxxx et al, 2010). Often times, follow-up with participants is simply not possible, or just not part of the program. Further complicating this issue is that fact that certain environmental factors contribute to the baseline behavior of participants, and, because the environment typically persists after the intervention is completed, facilitate return to baseline behavior (Xxx et al, 2013). For the participants in the FVRx program, these behaviors would be returning to a diet full of highly processed, unhealthy foods. This highlights the importance of incorporating strategies that equip participants with enough knowledge and self-efficacy to empower them to continue their healthy behaviors. Additionally, conducting follow-up with participants at various intervals, whether with phone calls, or hosting meet-ups like the FVRx alumni events, could be a useful strategy to increase likelihood of continued behavior. As far as research-related next steps for the FVRx program, I think it will be beneficial to continue to collect qualitative information from the participants to help strengthen the evidence base of the program. This is a 6-month program, which is relatively short. Therefore, while the post-program health data may show some positive changes in the patients’ health, whether that is a slight decrease in weight or blood pressure, I think the real benefits of the program are highlighted through the participant’s personal, first-hand feedback. Talking...

Limitations and Recommendations. ‌ As for the recommendations in the upcoming studies, researchers may look at the influence of school climate factors on other educationally-related outcomes such as re-enrolment, attendance, and participation in extra-curricular activities--other important outcomes in school. Furthermore, the researchers may analyze the disruptive student behavior deeper since it was discovered as the most crucial school climate factor. Its relation with other scales may be studied, too. The relation between Teacher Enthusiasm and Teacher Behaviour and Student Learning could also be researched since the current study found a strong relationship between these categories. Therefore, there are many ways how this type of research can be elaborated and extended in the future.

Limitations and Recommendations. Various maps detail the locations of specific pesticide production processes on site at UCIL. The location for the source of CCl4 was chosen based on Figure 2. However, the two locations chosen for calibration (IT9030 and IT9035), while located northeast of the chosen source, they were not along a linear axis. In order to determine the calibration concentration, an average of the CCl4 concentrations measured in 1999 (Labunska et al. 1999) was chosen. The ACTS software provides a convenient method for characterizing contaminant plumes in groundwater. The software relies on the user to collect contaminant and hydrogeologic parameters for use as inputs into a user-generated model. ACTS is capable of running both deterministic and probabilistic scenarios. The deterministic model is used when single value inputs are used to produce a single value output, characterizing the concentration of contaminants at a point in space and time. The probabilistic model takes into account the uncertainty in parameters, and characterizes the contaminant plume as a range of probabilities that the concentration of the chosen contaminant exists at a certain location in space and time. Because this study was performed remotely, all of the parameters were chosen from the literature. Many studies performed in Bhopal at the site of the UCIL factory report contaminant and hydrogeologic data; however, certain parameters (aquifer porosity and bulk density of soil) were chosen from a reference of typical values (Cherry and Freeze 1979, Xxxxxxx 1981). This introduces a level of uncertainty when running the model simulation in ACTS. This is dealt with to some degree in the probabilistic simulations. There is also some disagreement regarding the direction of groundwater flow in the region of UCIL. Within the NEERI report from 2010, the direction of groundwater is reported to be in both the Northeast and Southeast direction. This, they claim, is due to the variable nature of groundwater flow depending on the conditions (NEERI 2010). The Greenpeace report from 1999, citing an earlier report by NEERI, state that the direction of groundwater flow is along a Northeast axis. Given that the contaminant concentrations used for calibration increased along the Northeast axis, it was assumed for the purposes of this study that the direction of groundwater flow was along the Northeast axis. More detailed studies of the aquifer will be crucial to more accurately characterize the nature of the aquifer an...

Related to Limitations and Recommendations

Conclusions and Recommendations Based on our country-by-country analysis, 197 of the AEWA populations are already well-monitored both for population size and trend. Our prioritisation method allowed focusing on the AEWA conservation and management priorities (Priorities 1-2) and to consider cost effectiveness and feasibility (Priorities 3-6). Theoretically, the two- third target of the AEWA Strategic Plan can be just attained by focusing on the development of monitoring activities for Priority 1-5 populations (i.e. leaving out the 168 more widespread Priority 6 populations that would require more species-specific monitoring methods. Most of the Priority 1-5 populations would require improvement of the IWC though regional schemes focusing on the West Asian / East African flyway with possibly three subregional components in the Central Asia, Arabia and Eastern and Southern Africa. In the latter region, improvements in Tanzania and Mozambique are particularly important. In the Black Sea - Mediterranean - Sahelian flyway the focus should be primarily on the Sahel countries and especially on increasing the consistency of annual counts. The quality of monitoring is already better in the Black Sea and Mediterranean regions. In the East Atlantic, the ongoing capacity-building activities should continue and the consistency and representativity of site coverage should be further strengthened in most countries. Angola would require a major capacity improvement but primarily for the intra-African migrants on inland wetlands. It is also clear that the targets of the AEWA Strategic Plan cannot be achieved without complementing the IWC with periodic aerial surveys both in Western Africa as well as in Eastern and Southern Africa, by setting up a periodic offshore waterbird monitoring scheme in the Caspian Sea and by focusing in each country on a relatively small number of breeding bird species strategically selected in this report.
Board Recommendation The Acquiror Company Board, by unanimous written consent, has determined that this Agreement and the transactions contemplated by this Agreement are advisable and in the best interests of the Acquiror Company’s stockholders and has duly authorized this Agreement and the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.
Procedures for Actions and Consents of Partners The actions requiring Consent of any Partner or Partners pursuant to this Agreement, including Section 7.3 hereof, or otherwise pursuant to applicable law, are subject to the procedures set forth in this Article 14.
Company Board Recommendation (a) Subject to the terms of Section 6.3(b) and Section 6.3(c), the Company Board shall recommend that the holders of Company Shares accept the Offer, tender their Company Shares to Acquisition Sub pursuant to the Offer and, if required by the applicable provisions of Delaware Law, adopt this Agreement (the “Company Board Recommendation”). (b) Neither the Company Board nor any committee thereof shall (i) fail to make the Company Board Recommendation to the holders of the Company Shares, (ii) withhold, withdraw, amend or modify in a manner adverse to Parent, or publicly propose to withhold, withdraw, amend or modify in a manner adverse to Parent, the Company Board Recommendation, (iii) adopt, approve, recommend, endorse or otherwise declare advisable the adoption of any Acquisition Proposal (it being understood that, only with respect to a tender offer or exchange offer, taking a neutral position or no position (other than in a communication made in compliance with Rule 14d-9(f) promulgated under the Exchange Act) with respect to any Acquisition Proposal shall be considered a breach of this clause (iii)), or (iv) resolve, agree or publicly propose to take any such actions (each such foregoing action or failure to act in clauses (i) through (iv) being referred to herein as an “Company Board Recommendation Change”). Notwithstanding the foregoing or anything to the contrary set forth in this Agreement, if, at any time prior to the Appointment Time, the Company Board receives a Superior Proposal or there occurs an Intervening Event, the Company Board may effect a Company Board Recommendation Change provided that (i) the Company Board determines in good faith (after consultation with outside legal counsel) that the failure to effect a Company Board Recommendation Change would reasonably be expected to be a breach of its fiduciary duties to the Company Stockholders under applicable Delaware Law, and in the case of a Superior Proposal, the Company Board approves or recommends such Superior Proposal; (ii) the Company has notified Parent in writing that it intends to effect a Company Board Recommendation Change, describing in reasonable detail the reasons, including the material terms and conditions of any such Superior Proposal and a copy of the final form of any related agreements or a description in reasonable detail of such Intervening Event, as the case may be, for such Company Board Recommendation Change (a “Recommendation Change Notice”) (it being understood that the Recommendation Change Notice shall not constitute a Company Board Recommendation Change for purposes of this Agreement); (iii) if requested by Parent, the Company shall have made its Representatives available to discuss and negotiate in good faith with Parent’s Representatives any proposed modifications to the terms and conditions of this Agreement during the three (3) Business Day period following delivery by the Company to Parent of such Recommendation Change Notice; and (iv) if Parent shall have delivered to the Company a written proposal capable of being accepted by the Company to alter the terms or conditions of this Agreement during such three (3) Business Day period, the Company Board shall have determined in good faith (after consultation with outside legal counsel), after considering the terms of such proposal by Parent, that a Company Board Recommendation Change is still necessary in light of such Superior Proposal or Intervening Event in order to comply with its fiduciary duties to the Company Stockholders under applicable Delaware Law. Any material amendment or modification to any Superior Proposal will be deemed to be a new Superior Proposal for purposes of this Section 6.3. The Company shall keep confidential any proposals made by Parent to revise the terms of this Agreement, other than in the event of any amendment to this Agreement and to the extent required to be disclosed in any Company SEC Reports. (c) Nothing in this Agreement shall prohibit the Company Board from (i) taking and disclosing to the Company Stockholders a position contemplated by Rule 14e-2(a) under the Exchange Act or complying with the provisions of Rule 14d-9 promulgated under the Exchange Act, and (ii) making any disclosure to the Company Stockholders that the Company Board determines in good faith (after consultation with its outside legal counsel) that the failure to make such disclosure would reasonably be expected to be a breach of its fiduciary duties to the Company Stockholders under applicable Delaware Law; provided, however, that in no event shall this Section 6.3(c) affect the obligations of the Company set forth in Sections 6.2 and 6.3; and provided, further, that any such disclosure will be deemed to be a Company Board Recommendation Change unless the Board of Directors publicly reaffirms the Company Board Recommendation within five Business Days of such disclosure.
PROMOTIONS AND VACANCIES 3.1 The Employer will determine when a position will be filled, the type of appointment to be used when filling the position, and the skills and abilities necessary to perform the duties of the specific position within a job classification that is being filled. Only those candidates who have the position-specific skills and abilities required to perform the duties of the vacant position will be referred for further consideration by the employing agency. 3.2 An agency’s internal layoff list will consist of employees who have elected to place their name on the layoff list through Article 35, Layoff and Recall, of this Agreement and are confined to each individual agency. 3.3 The statewide layoff list will consist of employees who have elected to place their name on the statewide layoff list in accordance with WAC 000-00-000. 3.4 A promotional candidate is defined as an employee who has completed the probationary period within a permanent appointment and has attained permanent status within the agency. 3.5 A transfer candidate is defined as an employee in permanent status in the same classification as the vacancy within the agency. 3.6 A voluntary demotion candidate is defined as an employee in permanent status moving to a class in a lower salary range maximum within the agency. 3.7 When filling a vacant position with a permanent appointment, candidates will be certified for further consideration in the following manner: A. The most senior candidate on the agency’s internal layoff list with the required skills and abilities who has indicated an appropriate geographic availability will be appointed to the position. B. If there are no names on the internal layoff list, the agency will certify up to twenty (20) candidates for further consideration. Up to seventy-five percent (75%) of those candidates will be statewide layoff, agency promotional, internal transfers, and agency voluntary demotions. All candidates certified must have the position-specific skills and abilities to perform the duties of the position to be filled. If there is a tie for the last position on the certification for either promotional or other candidates, the agency may consider up to ten (10) additional tied candidates. The agency may supplement the certification with additional tied candidates and replace other candidates who waive consideration with like candidates from the original pool. C. Employees in the General Government Transition Pool Program who have the skills and abilities to perform the duties of the vacant position may be considered along with all other candidates who have the skills and abilities to perform the duties of the position. D. If the certified candidate pool does not contain at least three (3) affirmative action candidates, the agency may add up to three (3) affirmative action candidates to the names certified for the position. When recruiting for multiple positions, the agency may add an additional five (5) agency candidates and five (5) other candidates to the certified list for each additional position.
Certain Notifications and Required Actions After the date of this Agreement, the Company shall promptly advise the Representative in writing of: (i) the receipt of any comments of, or requests for additional or supplemental information from, the Commission; (ii) the time and date of any filing of any post-effective amendment to the Registration Statement or any amendment or supplement to any preliminary prospectus, the Time of Sale Prospectus, the Prospectus or the Exchange Act Registration Statement; (iii) the time and date that any post-effective amendment to the Registration Statement becomes effective; and (iv) the issuance by the Commission of any stop order suspending the effectiveness of the Registration Statement or any post-effective amendment thereto or any amendment or supplement to any preliminary prospectus, the Time of Sale Prospectus, the Prospectus or the Exchange Act Registration Statement or of any order preventing or suspending the use of any preliminary prospectus, the Time of Sale Prospectus, or the Prospectus, or of any proceedings to remove, suspend or terminate from listing or quotation the Units from any securities exchange upon which they are listed for trading or included or designated for quotation, or of the threatening or initiation of any proceedings for any of such purposes. If, at any time, the Commission shall enter any such stop order, the Company will use its best efforts to obtain the lifting of such order at the earliest possible moment. Additionally, the Company agrees that it shall comply in all material respects with all applicable provisions of Rule 424(b), Rule 433 and Rule 430A under the Securities Act and will use its reasonable efforts to confirm that any filings made by the Company under Rule 424(b) or Rule 433 were received in a timely manner by the Commission.
Change of Recommendation Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, at any time prior to obtaining the Company Stockholder Approval, the Company’s Board of Directors may, if it concludes in good faith (after consultation with its financial advisors and outside legal advisors) that the failure to take such action would be inconsistent with its fiduciary duties under applicable Law, make an Adverse Recommendation Change; provided that prior to any such Adverse Recommendation Change, (A) the Company shall have given Parent and Merger Sub prompt written notice advising them of (x) the decision of the Company’s Board of Directors to take such action and the reasons therefor and (y) in the event the decision relates to an Alternative Transaction Proposal, a summary of the material terms and conditions of the Alternative Transaction Proposal and other information requested to be provided with respect thereto pursuant to this Section 5.4, including the information required to be provided pursuant to Section 5.4(b) and (c), (B) the Company shall have given Parent and Merger Sub three (3) Business Days (the “Notice Period”) after delivery of each such notice to propose revisions to the terms of this Agreement (or make another proposal) and, during the Notice Period, the Company shall, and shall direct its financial advisors and outside legal advisors to, negotiate with Parent in good faith (to the extent Parent desires to negotiate) to make such adjustments in the terms and conditions of this Agreement so that, if applicable, such Alternative Transaction Proposal ceases to constitute (in the judgment of the Company’s Board of Directors, after consultation with its financial advisors and outside legal advisors), a Superior Proposal or, if the Adverse Recommendation Change does not involve an Alternative Transaction Proposal, to make such adjustments in the terms and conditions of this Agreement so that such Adverse Recommendation Change is otherwise not necessary, and (C) the Company’s Board of Directors shall have determined in good faith, after considering the results of such negotiations and giving effect to the proposals made by Parent and Merger Sub, if any, that such Alternative Transaction Proposal, if applicable, continues to constitute a Superior Proposal or that such Adverse Recommendation Change is otherwise still required; provided further that, (1) if during the Notice Period described in clause (B) of this paragraph any revisions are made to the Superior Proposal, if applicable, and the Company’s Board of Directors in its good faith judgment determines (after consultation with its financial advisors and outside legal advisors) that such revisions are material (it being understood that any change in the purchase price or form of consideration in such Superior Proposal shall be deemed a material revision), the Company shall deliver a new written notice to Parent and shall comply with the requirements of this Section 5.4(d) with respect to such new written notice except that the new Notice Period shall be two (2) Business Days instead of three (3) Business Days and (2) in the event the Company’s Board of Directors does not make the determination referred to in clause (C) of this paragraph but thereafter determines to make an Adverse Recommendation Change pursuant to this Section 5.4(d), the procedures referred to in clauses (A), (B) and (C) above shall apply anew and shall also apply to any subsequent withdrawal, amendment or change.
No Change in Recommendation or Alternative Acquisition Agreement The board of directors of the Company and each committee of the board of directors shall not: (i) (A) withhold, withdraw, qualify or modify (or publicly propose or resolve to withhold, withdraw, qualify or modify), in a manner adverse to Parent, the Company Recommendation (B) fail to include the Company Recommendation in the Proxy Statement, (C) approve, recommend or otherwise declare advisable or propose or resolve to approve, recommend or otherwise declare advisable (publicly or otherwise), any Acquisition Proposal, or (D) fail to publicly reaffirm the Company Recommendation within ten business days after Parent so requests in writing (provided, that Parent shall be entitled to make such a written request for reaffirmation only once for each Acquisition Proposal and once for each material amendment to such Acquisition Proposal) (any action described in clauses (A) and (D) a “Change of Recommendation”); or (ii) Except as expressly permitted by, and after compliance with this Section 6.2(d), cause or permit the Company to enter into any Alternative Acquisition Agreement. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in this Agreement, prior to the time, but not after, the Company Requisite Vote is obtained, the board of directors of the Company (x) may make a Change of Recommendation and in connection therewith, approve, recommend or otherwise declare advisable, and enter into an Alternative Acquisition Agreement in connection with a Superior Proposal made after the date of this Agreement (if such Superior Proposal did not result from a material breach of Section 6.2(a) and such Superior Proposal is not withdrawn) or (y) may make a Change of Recommendation as a result of the occurrence of an Intervening Event, if, the board of directors of the Company determines in good faith, after consultation with its outside legal counsel, that failure to do so would be reasonably likely to be inconsistent with the directors’ fiduciary duties under applicable Law; provided, however, that the board of directors of the Company shall not (i) in the case of clause (x) make a Change of Recommendation with respect to a Superior Proposal and authorize the Company to enter into any Alterative Acquisition Agreement or (ii) in the case of clause (y) make a Change of Recommendation unless: (i) the Company has notified Parent in writing that it intends to effect a Change of Recommendation, describing in reasonable detail the reasons for such Change of Recommendation (a “Recommendation Change Notice”) (it being agreed that the Recommendation Change Notice and any amendment or update to such notice and the determination to so deliver such notice, or update or amend public disclosures with respect thereto shall not constitute a Change of Recommendation for purposes of this Agreement), and if such proposed Change of Recommendation relates to an Acquisition Proposal, has provided copies of the most current version of all documents relating to such Acquisition Proposal, and if such proposed Change of Recommendation relates to an Intervening Event, such Recommendation Change Notice specifies the facts and circumstances of such Intervening Event; and (ii) (x) if requested by Parent, the Company shall have made its Representatives available to discuss and negotiate in good faith with Parent and its Representatives any proposed modifications to the terms and conditions of this Agreement during the three business days following the date on which the Recommendation Change Notice is delivered to Parent and (y) if Parent shall have delivered to the Company a written, binding and irrevocable offer to alter the terms or conditions of this Agreement during such three business day period, the board of directors of the Company shall have determined in good faith after consultation with its financial advisors and outside legal counsel, after considering the terms of such offer by Parent, that the failure to effect a Change of Recommendation would be reasonably likely to be inconsistent with its fiduciary duties under applicable Law, and that in the case of a Change of Recommendation with respect to an Acquisition Proposal, such Acquisition Proposal would continue to constitute a Superior Proposal if the changes offered by Parent were given effect, and that in the case of an Intervening Event, the board of directors of the Company still intends to effect a Change of Recommendation if the changes offered by Parent were given effect; provided that in the event the Acquisition Proposal is thereafter modified by the party making such Acquisition Proposal, the Company shall notify Parent in writing of such modified Acquisition Proposal and shall again comply with the requirements of this clause (ii).
No Government Recommendation or Approval The Subscriber understands that no federal or state agency has passed upon or made any recommendation or endorsement of the offering of the Shares.
Prohibition on Press Releases and Public Announcements The Company shall not issue press releases or engage in any other publicity, without the Representative’s prior written consent, for a period ending at 5:00 p.m., Eastern time, on the first (1st) Business Day following the forty-fifth (45th) day after the Closing Date, other than normal and customary releases issued in the ordinary course of the Company’s business.

Limitations and Recommendations Sample Clauses

Filter & Search

Related Clauses

Parent Clauses

Related to Limitations and Recommendations