The introduction of the article conforms to the CONSORT item 2a and 2b. There is comprehensive background information, including the literature review and the study`s aims, item 2a. The introduction has not provided the study`s research questions against the CONSORT item 2a. The study`s target population is college students of Midwest University, as provided in the introduction. However, the introduction has omitted the clinical reasons that necessitate college students to be used as the target population. The introduction has followed the CONSORT item 2a by providing the past literature review results. However, there is minimal evidence and arguments based on the literature on the need for the new research. A good background of the study should provide the results of the past literature review and arguments and evidence based on it to show a need for new research.
Following CONSORT item 2b, the article`s introduction has provided the aims and hypothesis of the study. The study`s purposes or objectives have been adequately described in the last paragraph of the introduction as expected from item 2b of the CONSORT. The introduction has not stated the hypothesis of the study but rather has just stated that ‘’we stated the hypothesis that interventions of sleep education encourages change in sleep behaviours and promotes sleep education’’. According to item 2b, the introduction has not stated the specific question the new study intends to answer. The aims and objectives of the study are essential to evidence-based practitioners since they enable them to come up with better conclusions that lead to better patient care and allow them to advance their careers.
According to the article’s trial design, the methods show that the study was a randomised controlled trial, evidenced by the groups` sizes in the results and subjects. The characteristics of the sample in the article match the eligibility criteria conforming to item 4a and item 15 of the CONSORT. Tables have been used to show the baseline data and the clinical characteristics of the sample. The sample size calculations have been omitted against item 4a of the CONSORT. The description of the sample in methods is similar to the descriptions that appear in the results. Consistent with item 14a, the sample size of each group has been stated, for instance, both for the control and intervention group for recruitment. The study`s data collection was through questionnaires and analysed using Pearson chi-square tests, which conforms to item 4b of the CONSORT.
However, the study omitted the locations where the data was collected, as stated in item 4b of the CONSORT. Several pieces of equipment have been adequately used in the study that enables the clinician and other evidence-based practitioners to evaluate the effectiveness of the equipment when coming up with results that conform to item 5 of the CONSORT. The methods used in the study is against item 5 and 11b since it has not provided treatment, placebo, and control which are conditions for evaluating the interventions. Eligibility measures and outcomes from items 6a and 6b have been described but are minimal. For instance, the description of the sample is adequate in that it does not have more explanation. There is minimal data collection data, but data analysis has been explicitly described. Survey instruments have been adequately represented in the article, but not much has been said on the survey process. The Chi-square test was used in the as in item 7a. Randomisation, items 8a, 9, and 10 were used in developing the sample size, where students were divided into control and intervention groups. Blinding was omitted in the study, which is against item 11a; the students were not aware of the study`s outcomes. IBM SPSS software was used in the methods as in item12a; independent t-tests were employed for group comparisons. No ethics have been mentioned in the methods against items 7b and 14b. The study omitted flow diagrams to show the participant flow, items 13a, 13b, and 16; instead, a table was used.
Tables have been used in the study to show the baseline data and the clinical characteristics for each group; this is consistent with items 15 and 4a. Several tables have been used. For example, table 2 shows continuous baseline variables and other tables from table 3 to 6. The use of numerical values in the study has facilitated confidence intervals and apparent standard deviations for each group. There are inferential results in p values, conforming to item 17a. No binary outcomes are evident in the study against item 17b of the CONSORT. No qualitative findings have been reported; instead, the study employed quantitative research and analysis, implying that the study`s findings were quantitative. The study participants experienced no harm or unexpected events; thus no need to mention them in the study, item 19.