Comparability studies difference interpretation

The guidelines are interpreted in a very prescriptive manner, and have been the subject of ongoing discussion. Improved health outcomes that are difficult to quantify, such as indirect benefits, are accorded a low weighting. Also large head-to-head comparative studies with adequate power to yield significant differences may be required before superior outcomes are regarded as proven. 

Comparative Toxicokinetics. There are currently not enough data to evaluate any potential species-related differences in response to radium exposure by any route. It would be useful to have information on which animal models most closely approximate humans in this regard in order to help interpret the relevance to humans of any toxicity findings in animal studies. Studies on the toxicokinetics of radium following inhalation, oral, and dermal exposure are needed to compare the different routes of exposure. 

Unfortunately the theory, when used for data interpretation, is based on many simplifications that are not always valid. The success of the method depends on the significance of the axial dispersion and the interfacial mass transfer and on the accuracy of the description of these effects. A comparative study of different measuring technique by [25] has shown, for the chromatographic method, that experimental uncertainties may lead to significantly broader confidence limits for the diffusion coefficients than for measurements in single pellets in a diffusion cell. 

It may be useful just to describe observations. Other authors, including Petrov ), Voinov ) and Rame and Garoff ) considered the transition zone, theoretically and/or experimentally, proposed various models of the rest, investigations tend to be limited to the study of scaling laws of a limited range of validity. Experience has shown that, to explain a(u) data, the Blake and Cox approach usually give similar results, notwithstanding very different Interpretations. So, comparative checks are not always discriminative, and in this respect, much remains to be done. 

It should be emphasized that all interpretations and conclusions should be treated as a consequence of the assumed adsorption models. This choice towards a real adsorption system is difficult and even sometimes impossible.On the other hand, the physical interpretation of the distribution function F(Ei2) is a basic problem in adsorption on heterogeneous solids from solutions. This distribution gives only a quantitative characterization of the energetic adsorbent heterogeneity with respect to the adsorbates. Comparative studies of the functions F(Ei2) obtained from the data referring to the same adsorbent and different adsorbates or data dealing with the adsorption of one selected adsorbate on adsorbents of controlled heterogeneity can be useful in physical interpretation of the function F(Ei2). 

---