Guided Critical of a Journal Article - Literature review Example

Guided critical review of a Journal Article Name: Institution: Professor: Course: Date of Submission: Guided critical review of a Journal Article Introduction In order to ascertain the credibility of research findings, it is paramount that the research be subject to thorough analysis and evaluation. As such, this paper offers a guided critical review of a journal article, “A quasi-experimental study on a community-based stroke prevention program for clients with minor stroke” by Sit et al, 2007. The paper purposes to critique the appropriateness of the question that the research was designed to answer; the research design; reliability and validity of the data as well as the data analysis approach in the study. The paper therefore attempts to validate whether or not the information and assertions put forth by Sit et al, are worth adoption within the medical practice. Research Question In their study, Sit et al had the following as the question that the research was designed to answer: how effective is the community based stroke prevention programme; as it regards to: (1) improving understanding concerning stroke; (2) developing self-health-monitoring practice; (3) sustaining behavioral changes when implementing a healthy daily life for stroke avoidance. This comes from the claims that most patients suffering from minor stroke assume its effect. This could be disastrous in the long run. The patients therefore need to be well-informed about this fact. Research Method As a way of research design, Sit et al adopted a quasi-experimental design. The design utilized descriptive as well as multivariate approaches. The recruits in the 1st, 3rd and 5th slots formed the intervention, while the 2nd, 4th and 6th slot recruitments made up the control group. Assessment was done on all groups three times in a period of 3 months marked T0, T1and T2. The time period for the assessments was at the baseline, after a week and lastly after 3 months. The quasi-experimental design as used by Sit et al presents a weakness in the research. The method lacks random assignment. This implies that it becomes difficult to analyse the numerical statistics in the groups. In the study, data was collected using a structured questionnaire. The questionnaire had four sections touching on lifestyle, medical observance, information about stroke and demographic outline. The researchers then gathered data by face to face interviews. Although the ethical issues were well taken care of, given the sensitive nature of the study on the individual’s privacy, it is likely that the subjects would lie. Questions touching on personal information regarding drinking, smoking and other forms of habits are sensitive and could attract dishonest responses. External Validity of the Study In the design, 190 subjects were picked. Among them, 147 completed the study. The 147 were divided into 77 in the intervention group while the remaining 70 made up the control group. The data was collected at the baseline, after a week and lastly after 3 months. The subjects were required to attend two-hour sessions for eight weeks. The sessions were meant to promote awareness among the subjects as it regards to their health. In the research, the intervention group was seen to exhibit changes. The changes regarded their understanding about stroke, their attempts to seek medication, compliance, self blood monitoring and change in lifestyle. Unfortunately, no positive signs were noted in walking exercise within the intervention group. In addition, the sample is not representative enough. It is not clear whether the sample consisted of persons from the same sex. For a sample to be representative, it is important to bring on board subjects that reflect different ages, race and sex. This way, the study findings cannot be generalized to other setting. Similarly, another flaw and set back to the study was the fact that there were dropouts. Information provided in the study indicates that 190 subjects were picked. Among them, only 147 completed the study with 25% from intervention and 19% in the control group opting out. Internal Reliability and Validity For results that will be useful, the research findings should be reliable. The concept reliability in research means there is constancy in the findings. This has an insinuation that the research will produce same or similar results if it was done by someone else some other time and in a different setting. The idea of reliability has been demonstrated in the study by the research team grouping questions in the survey that assess the same idea. In this case, all the questions that were asked to the subjects, aimed at showing how effective community based stroke prevention programme is in managing and handling stroke cases. On the other hand, the concept of validity in research implies the truthfulness of the research assertion in comparison to what actually is happening on the ground. This means that the conclusion that is made in the research should truthfully indicate the state of affairs. It gauges if the research is actually right or wrong. Considering the internal validity in the program, the interest will be to ascertain as to whether or not there was a relationship between the outcome and the purpose of the program. There was limited validity in the research as a result of the Hawthorne effect. The good results shown by the intervention group may have resulted from the fact that the group was being watched and the frequent professional contact with the subjects. Results /Data Analysis The research identified differences in outcomes between the intervention and control groups. Comparison in outcomes was found out that there was a significant difference in medical compliance at T1 which stood at P=0.004. Treatment seeking reaction if assumed to have a stroke was at P Read More

In the research, the intervention group was seen to exhibit changes. The changes regarded their understanding about stroke, their attempts to seek medication, compliance, self blood monitoring and change in lifestyle. Unfortunately, no positive signs were noted in walking exercise within the intervention group. In addition, the sample is not representative enough. It is not clear whether the sample consisted of persons from the same sex. For a sample to be representative, it is important to bring on board subjects that reflect different ages, race and sex.

This way, the study findings cannot be generalized to other setting. Similarly, another flaw and set back to the study was the fact that there were dropouts. Information provided in the study indicates that 190 subjects were picked. Among them, only 147 completed the study with 25% from intervention and 19% in the control group opting out. Internal Reliability and Validity For results that will be useful, the research findings should be reliable. The concept reliability in research means there is constancy in the findings.

This has an insinuation that the research will produce same or similar results if it was done by someone else some other time and in a different setting. The idea of reliability has been demonstrated in the study by the research team grouping questions in the survey that assess the same idea. In this case, all the questions that were asked to the subjects, aimed at showing how effective community based stroke prevention programme is in managing and handling stroke cases. On the other hand, the concept of validity in research implies the truthfulness of the research assertion in comparison to what actually is happening on the ground.

This means that the conclusion that is made in the research should truthfully indicate the state of affairs. It gauges if the research is actually right or wrong. Considering the internal validity in the program, the interest will be to ascertain as to whether or not there was a relationship between the outcome and the purpose of the program. There was limited validity in the research as a result of the Hawthorne effect. The good results shown by the intervention group may have resulted from the fact that the group was being watched and the frequent professional contact with the subjects.

Results /Data Analysis The research identified differences in outcomes between the intervention and control groups. Comparison in outcomes was found out that there was a significant difference in medical compliance at T1 which stood at P=0.004. Treatment seeking reaction if assumed to have a stroke was at P

Read More