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