performed. The study was performed in accordance with the clinical and laboratory audit procedures of the institutions involved. • or was this paper simply a descriptive case review? No‚ it ’s not a descriptive review. It ’s a single-center
Premium Scientific method Academic publishing Research
de las Alas Campus Indang‚ Cavite ’ (046) 862-0939 / 862-0940 www.cvsu.edu.ph CvSU ERB Form 04. Ethics Review Board Ethical Review Checklist TITLE: PROPONENT/INVESTIGATOR: Co - Investigators/Co-Researchers: Sponsor: For the Principal Investigator/Proponent: This checklist has been prepared to ensure that the protocol submission complies with GCP standards. Please review the checklist carefully. In the 2nd column‚ please indicate the page in the protocol where the item (if applicable
Premium Informed consent Ethics Participation
II. Search Searching for good information is the most important part of an I-Search paper. I assumed that there would be plenty about Jerry Rice‚ and there was‚ but on overwhelming amount of it was career statistics. Although that is important‚ since it is proof of his remarkable talent and success‚ I wanted to know more about the personal side of his life. To start my search‚ I needed to find a good amount of information in various sources: magazine articles‚ newspaper articles‚ internet
Premium Information retrieval School
The Effect of Electronic Word of Mouth and Online Review Characteristics on a Hotel Choice Neema Gurung Southeast Missouri State University Abstract Word of mouth whether it is traditional or online is always found to have influential effect on the purchasing decision making of the consumers. It is especially seen to be more significant in the hospitality and tourism products and services since it contains more
Premium Peer review Decision making Scientific method
Reviews‚ Reputation‚ and Revenue: The Case of Yelp.com Michael Luca Working Paper 12-016 September 16‚ 2011 Copyright © 2011 by Michael Luca Working papers are in draft form. This working paper is distributed for purposes of comment and discussion only. It may not be reproduced without permission of the copyright holder. Copies of working papers are available from the author. Reviews‚ Reputation‚ and Revenue: The Case of Yelp.com Michael Luca† September 2011 Abstract Do online
Premium Take-out Restaurant Regression analysis
Remember-NYTimes.com." Movie Reviews‚ Showtimes and Trailers - Movies - New York Times - The New York Times. 25 Jan. 2002. Web. 12. Aug. 2012. <http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/review? * "Dear John." StudyMode.com. 12 Aug. 2012. <http://www.studymode.com/essays/Dear-John-548105.html>. * "A Walk to Remember (2002) - IMDb." IMDb - Movies‚ TV and Celebrities. 1990. Web. 12 Aug 2012. <http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0281358/>. * "Dear John by Nicholas Sparks - Book Review of Dear John - Nicholas
Premium Nicholas Sparks
Sign Up Help (/faq) Log in (/login) Book Reviews : Mahasweta Devi‚ Mother of 1084. Translated with an Introductory Essay by Samik Bandyopadhyay. Calcutta: Seagull Books‚ 1997. 130 pages. Rs 160. Mahasweta Devi and Usha Ganguli‚ Rudali—From Fiction to Performance. Translated with an Introductory Essay by Anjum Katyal. Calcutta: Seagull Books‚ 1997. 156 pages‚ Rs 175. Mahasweta Devi‚ Five Plays. Translated by Samik Bandyopadhyay. Cal cutta : Seagull Books‚ 1997. 149 pages. Rs 150. Mahasweta
Premium Hinduism Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak Mahasweta Devi
(or editors) determines whether to reject the submission outright or begin the process of peer review. In the latter case‚ the submission becomes subject to anonymous peer-review by outside scholars of the editor’s choosing. The number of these peer reviewers (or "referees") varies according to each journal’s editorial practice — typically‚ no fewer than two‚ and usually at least three outside peers review the article. The editor(s) uses the reviewers’ opinions in determining whether to publish the
Free Academic publishing Peer review
Peer Review Analysis‚ Week 5 BUS/475 December 8‚ 2014 Gregory Kosicki Peer Review Analysis Team A reviewed the papers of Crystal Thomas and Valerie Sanchez for our final team review. The previous two reviews provided the team members being evaluated with constructive criticism and acknowledgements of their success. The review process also provided the team members giving the reviews with insights into how to improve their assignments. This final review will accomplish the same goals. Crystal Thomas
Premium Balanced scorecard Peer review Management
Final Year Project Review Tutorials 5. Project Profile Document Part 2 Preparation This tutorial will take place in the week beginning 25th February 2013. Check your on-line timetable for details. Before the tutorial‚ you should prepare and print out a draft copy of Part 2 of your Project Profile Document. This part of the document is all about the context of your project. Think of it as the sort of thing you might use to help you prepare for a job interview to show that you have an awareness
Premium Peer review Tutorial Tutor