Tables and Figures Sample Clauses
Tables and Figures. Where graphs or tables are used, all source data files must be supplied at the initial stage. Tables and Figures should be of reproducible quality, should include captions and should not duplicate material presented in the text. All Tables and Figures must be cited in the text. Tables should be numbered consecutively in the order of their first citation in the text. The table number and caption should be placed consistently throughout the report (either above or below the table). The default style is for the table number and caption to be placed above the table. The same guidance applies to numbering of Figures. Where figures have been imported from other software packages (e.g. graphs imported as pictures from Microsoft Excel) care must be taken to ensure that legends and axis titles are large enough to be legible in the printed report – see guidance on line artwork below. Explanatory notes should be placed in footnotes, not in the table or figure heading. Explain in footnotes all non-standard abbreviations. Contractors should check with the DCLG/WG/SG what the publication route is likely to be (web or hard copy). This may influence the format and file size of any pictures and images either embedded in the report or provided separately. For printed reports, all pictures and illustrations (line drawings, diagrams, graphs, boxes, photographs etc) must be suitable for high-quality reproduction at their intended size in the final publication. DCLG/WG/SG will not accept sub-standard illustrations, such as photocopies, pencil sketches, rough drawings, distorted or damaged material, or photographs that are too light, too dark or out of focus. Images scanned from printed media or downloaded from the Internet are not acceptable. Please supply each illustration both as an electronic file and in hard copy form (the latter should be a good-quality printout). You may also embed low resolution copies of the illustrations in your main document to give COMMS an indication of size and positioning. If you do this, please supply a separate text-only document, indicating within it the position of each illustration. Figures, pictures etc provided as electronic files should be identified with a file name that matches the number given to the figure, picture etc in the report e.g. Fig04.04.tif or Fig12.01.wmf. Printouts should be labelled with the corresponding electronic filenames. Note that all illustrations – drawings, graphs, photographs etc – should be identified as Figures...
Tables and Figures. Figure 2.1. Acculturation Conceptual Framework Figure 2.2 Literature Review Eligibility Flowchart
Tables and Figures. Figure 1. Screenshot of Diabetes App Lite by BHI Technologies, Inc. Figure 2. Screenshot of Glucose Buddy by Azumio Figure 3. Prevalence of functionalities found in selected glucose tracking apps Table 1. Survey results, all respondents (n=1601) Number (%) Country Do you have diabetes? Smartphone platform Table 2. Survey results among patients reporting a history of diabetes (n=588) Number (%) Country Diabetes type Do you use insulin? Do you use insulin? (type I Do you use insulin? (type II only, n=408) Do you use a diabetes app? Table 3. Characteristics of app usage among diabetic respondents reporting use of diabetes apps (n=18) Number (%) Language in which app is used How much did you pay for the app? Proportion of respondents reporting frequent use of the following documentation functionalities Proportion of respondents reporting frequent use of the following reminder features Information sharing
Tables and Figures. Table 4.1 Characteristics of the sample and prevalence of polygyny, DHS surveys in sub-Saharan Africa 1999-2004 9 Table 4.2 Percent distribution of couples by spousal agreement on approval of family planning, DHS surveys in sub-Saharan Africa 1999-2004 10 Table 4.3 Percent distribution of couples by spousal agreement on discussion of family planning issues, DHS surveys in sub-Saharan Africa 1999-2004 11 Table 5.1.1 Percentage of couples in which both partners approve of family planning, by selected characteristics: West and Central Africa 14 Table 5.1.2 Percentage of couples in which both partners approve of family planning, by selected characteristics: Eastern and Southern Africa 15 Table 5.2.1 Percentage of couples in which both partners discussed family planning, by selected characteristics: West and Central Africa 17 Table 5.2.2 Percentage of couples in which both partners discussed family planning, by selected characteristics: Eastern and Southern Africa 18 Table 5.3.1 Percentage of wives who used any modern contraceptive method, by selected characteristics: West and Central Africa 20 Table 5.3.2 Percentage of wives who used any modern contraceptive method, by selected characteristics: Eastern and Southern Africa 21
Tables and Figures. Appendix Table 1. Schedule of Assessments
Tables and Figures a. Figure
1. Directional acyclic graph illustrating the theoretical relationship between current perceived religious stigma and religious consistency, accounting for demographic, religious, and psychosocial factors 30
b. Figure 2. Flow chart illustrating the sample selection method of participants in the final analysis 31
c. Table 1. Univariate analyses showing the demographic distribution of MSM organized by religious history 32
d. Table 2. Bivariate analyses examining the distribution of MSM with a consistent lifetime religious affiliation compared to the total sample of MSM 35
e. Table 3. Final adjusted model showing factors related religious consistency, among MSM who were raised in and currently practice a religion 37
f. Figure 3. The relationship between covariates and religious consistency among MSM 38 VI. Appendices
a. Appendix A. Survey Instruments 39 b. Appendix B. SAS Code 43
Tables and Figures. Table 1: The GVC participation index, Slovenia 2011 (% share in total gross exports). Slovenia Developing countries Developed countries Total GVC participation 58.7 48.6 48.0 Forward participation 22.6 23.1 24.2 Backward participation 36.1 25.5 23.8 Source: WTO. Table 2: Descriptive statistics Pooled sample Complements with IP intensity downstream1 Complements with IP intensity upstream2 Substitutes with IP intensity downstream3 Substitutes with IP intensity upstream4 mean mean mean mean mean (std dev.) (std dev.) (std dev.) (std dev.) (std dev.) d OutFDI 0.184 0.165 0.218 0.197 0.161 (0.388) (0.371) (0.413) (0.398) (0.367) d OutFDI bilateral 0.031 0.026 0.042 0.040 0.015 (0.173) (0.159) (0.201) (0.197) (0.120) d integr 0.0004 0.0004 0.0003 0.0007 0.00003 (0.019) (0.019) (0.017) (0.026) (0.006) d integr IFEX 0.0003 0.0002 0.0002 0.0006 0.00001 (0.017) (0.015) (0.015) (0.024) (0.003) Upstreamness 2.523 2.523 2.503 2.531 2.530 (1.072) (1.033) (1.115) (1.045) (1.105) IMP demand elasticity (abs.) 1.167 1.725 1.357 0.892 0.848 (2.391) (4.707) (1.406) (0.167) (0.219) Inputs’ demand elasticity 1.150 1.185 1.196 1.108 1.134 (0.903) (0.817) (0.647) (1.172) (0.748) Industry Xxxxxxxxxx index (H¯jt) 0.718 0.720 0.694 0.737 0.711 (0.082) (0.086) (0.095) (0.066) (0.079) rel upst knintk 0.994 0.951 1.054 0.937 1.058 (0.072) (0.045) (0.034) (0.056) (0.035) IPR index 4.525 4.530 4.515 4.534 4.517 (0.241) (0.221) (0.253) (0.234) (0.258) Rule of law index 1.300 1.320 1.273 1.350 1.241 (0.649) (0.643) (0.660) (0.618) (0.678) Age 16.808 16.721 16.767 17.029 16.647 (8.011) (7.985) (8.363) (8.112) (7.620) Employment 361.775 136.495 316.481 435.193 512.303 (1,336.96) (306.311) (743.912) (1,466.0) (1,939.6) Ex propensity 0.313 0.297 0.290 0.354 0.295 (0.336) (0.331) (0.326) (0.349) (0.329) Kintensity 86,064.2 72,283.4 64,065.8 91,761.8 108,545.4 (576,600) (177,074) (208,802) (488,467) (971,779) Lproductivity 46,252.9 43,827.6 37,954.3 56,949.5 41,666.5 (112,858) (45,776.8) (47,796.3) (184,371.5) (64,002.0) Debt assets ratio 0.610 0.608 0.638 0.576 0.631 (0.242) (0.241) (0,245) (0.244) (0.233) No of observations 791,911 185,156 155,278 249,187 202,290 Note: Labour productivity (L productivity) and capital intensity (K intensity) are expressed in EUR. [1] d comp = 1 & d knint downstr =1; [2] d comp = 1 & d knint downstr = 0 [3] d comp = 0 & d knint downstr = 1 ; [4] d comp = 0 & d knint downstr = 0 Table 3: Probit and random effects probit model of integration at firm-market-product...
Tables and Figures. Table 8: Baseline characteristics of D-CLIP study participants (N=599) Variable Standard of Care N = 304 Intervention N = 295 N (%) or Mean ± SD*
Figure 3: Plot of heterogeneity in change in waist circumference, weight, and BMI in controls and intervention participants from 0 to 6 months in subgroups of the D-CLIP study population * Mean change in waist circumference differs significantly by glucose intolerance level (p = 0.03) in the intervention participants. Other subgroup means did not differ significantly for control or intervention arm participants.
Tables and Figures. Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of Legislators and Community Members Who Spoke in Opposition to HB 481… 20 Table 2: Occupation of Community Members Who Spoke in Opposition to HB481 20 Figure 1: Tactics Used by HB 481 Opponents 22 Table 3: Category of Abortion Narrative Shared in Anti-HB 481 Testimony 32