The correct answer is A) Did the researches tried to find any common factor in its subjects that would influence both hours spent sitting and the likelihood of developing diabetes?
The other options of the question are B) Who pay for this research and what possible motivations would they have to skew the results in a way that would benefit them? C) What are the average mortality rates associated with diabetes and does this risk offset the benefits of sitting comfortably at work? D) How did the researchers measure how many hours the subject sits per day and what qualifies as an official diabetes diagnosis?
A new high-profile study reports a strong connection between how long people sit every day and how likely they are to develop diabetes. The question that best represents a critical examination of the research is " Did the researches tried to find any common factor in its subjects that would influence both hours spent sitting and the likelihood of developing diabetes?"
A critical examination is the kind of evaluation approach that uses a systemathic and logical way to understand the phenomenon at study. The issue is studied in a systematic way to analyze the content and the variables in order to find the best alternative for the solution. That is why the question "A" best represents critical examination.
I believe the answer is <span>Trenton</span>
Answer: Creating a heuristic
Explanation:
Based on the information given in the question, Dmitri is engaged in the creation of an heuristic.
A heuristic approach simply refers to the problem solving whereby a practical method is used to being about solutions which are sufficient but may not be optimal at that point in time.
You shouldn't take anyone's advice you should do the research on the tablets to find the best one
Answer:
The Full Form Of WHO Is WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION
