Group comparisons Sample Clauses

Group comparisons. The group of patients whose consultation included symptom discussion were compared to the group whose consultation did not include symptom discussion in order to establish whether there were fundamental differences between these two groups. Chi squared tests for independence and t-­‐tests indicated no differences between the groups on any demographic variables including age, gender, ethnicity, marital status, first language or employment status. In terms of clinical characteristics there were no differences between groups in illness history including weeks spent in hospital, number of hospital admissions or number of compulsory hospital admissions. However, clinical differences were evident between the two groups according to their scores on the PANSS whereby those patients whose consultation included discussion of present psychotic symptoms had significantly higher scores on the PANSS positive symptom scale (t (143) = -­‐6.13, p = .000) and the PANSS general psychopathology scale (t (143) = -­‐3.87, p = .000) than those whose consultation had no discussion of present psychotic symptoms. Overall there was a significant difference between the groups in the total score of the PANSS (t (136) = -­‐ 15.19, p = .000), but there was no significant difference between the groups on the PANSS negative symptom scale (see Table 4 for summary of group comparisons). There was no difference between the two groups in length of consultation. Furthermore, the ratings of the therapeutic relationship by both the patient and the psychiatrist following the consultation, as measured using the STAR, were compared between the two groups. There were no significant differences between groups on their ratings of the therapeutic relationship, suggesting that the presence of discussion of psychotic symptoms did not influence the experience of the consultation, in terms of the therapeutic relationship, for either the patient or the psychiatrist.

Related to Group comparisons

  • GROUP COMPANIES Guangzhou Yiyan Cosmetics Co., Ltd. (广州逸妍化妆品有限公司) (Seal) By: /s/ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ Name: ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (吕建华) Title: Legal Representative Shanghai Yizi Cosmetics Co., Ltd. (上海逸姿化妆品有限公司) (Seal) By: /s/ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ Name: ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (吕建华) Title: Legal Representative Shanghai Yiqing Commercial and Trading Co., Ltd. (上海逸清商贸有限公司) (Seal) By: /s/ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ Name: ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (吕建华) Title: Legal Representative Yatsen (Guangzhou) Culture Creative Co., Ltd. (逸仙(广州)文化创意有限公司) (Seal) By: /s/ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ Name: ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ (陈宇文) Title: Legal Representative

  • Metrics Institutional Metrics System-Wide Metrics

  • Annual Evaluations The purpose of the annual evaluation is to assess and communicate the nature and extent of an employee's performance of assigned duties consistent with the criteria specified below in this Policy. Except for those employees who have received notice of non-reappointment pursuant to the BOT- UFF Policy on Non- reappointment, every employee shall be evaluated at least once annually. Personnel decisions shall take such annual evaluations into account, provided that such decisions need not be based solely on written faculty performance evaluations.

  • EMPLOYEE EVALUATIONS 6.1 Administrators will meet with new employees to discuss their job description within one (1) month of hire. The Administrator and new employee will sign off on the job description and it will be forwarded to the Human Resources Department for inclusion in the employee‘s personnel file. The Human Resources Department will compile and distribute a list showing each employee‘s evaluator prior to November 1st of each year. Bargaining unit job descriptions will be made available via the District‘s web site. 6.2 Evaluations will transpire as follows for employees that are receiving satisfactory ratings: a. New hires—regular part-time (school year employees) will be evaluated at three (3) and six (6) working months. b. New hires—full time (12 month employees) will be evaluated at three (3), six (6) and twelve (12) months. c. After the initial year of employment, each employee shall be evaluated at least once annually by March 31st. 6.3 Criteria for evaluating bargaining unit members will be based on the performance categories outlined on the evaluation form as related to the job description of their specific position assignment. 6.4 Evaluation reports shall include feedback regarding strengths and weaknesses (if any) demonstrated by the employee. Prior to an employee receiving a rating less than “Meets Expectations,” the employee shall be advised of the performance concern and provided with a clear statement of any deficiency and a statement defining acceptable performance. This shall occur within a reasonable time prior to the final evaluation to allow the employee a chance to demonstrate improvement. 6.5 In the event an employee is evaluated overall as “Does Not Meet Expectations,” the district, in consultation with the employee and the Association, will provide the employee a written plan of improvement (See Employee Plan of Improvement form in Appendix). The plan shall clearly define all areas of deficiency, provide clear and attainable performance goals, and outline supports (if any) to be given, including any necessary training at the District’s expense. The employee will be given a reasonable amount of time, not to exceed sixty (60) working days, to meet job performance expectations. During the improvement period, feedback will be provided through a minimum of three scheduled meetings. Following the completion of the plan, the supervisor shall notify the employee in writing of the outcome. Failure to demonstrate satisfactory improvement may constitute grounds for termination. 6.6 The bargaining unit member shall be given a copy of their evaluation, and any data collection sheets (with the submitters name excluded) used in the evaluation. 6.7 Under the law there is no right to Association Representation at evaluation conferences. 6.8 Any information shared with the evaluating administrator for the evaluation process shall be recorded on Data Collection Sheet(s), with the exception of those unit members that have supervising teachers. Supervising teachers will work directly with the evaluating administrator to share performance information for inclusion in the unit member‘s evaluation. 6.9 Employees shall have the right to respond to evaluations in writing. Such written response shall be attached to the evaluation if received within 5 days. 6.10 No bargaining unit member shall be required to sign a blank or incomplete evaluation form.

  • Certified and Minority Business Enterprises Reports Upon Customer request, the Contractor shall report to the requesting Customer the Contractor’s spend with certified and other minority business enterprises in the provision of commodities or services related to the Customer’s orders. These reports shall include the period covered, the name, minority code, and Federal Employer Identification Number of each minority business utilized during the period; commodities and services provided by the minority business enterprise, and the amount paid to each minority business enterprise on behalf of the Customer.