This essay will analyze the comparison of the effects of eccentric training, eccentric-concentric training and eccentric-concentric training combined with isometric contraction in the treatment of lateral elbow tendinopathy by Dimitrios Stasinopoulos and Ioannis Stasinopoulos. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay The title was not long, this is a positive point because it can attract the reader's attention (Litwak, 1996). It is important to grab the reader's attention, so they understand what the research will entail. Additionally, it works in association with the title succinctly referring to the topic of the research, so they can understand if the research would be relevant to them (Paiva, Lima, & Paiva, 2012). An abstract aims to give the reader a summary of the different subheadings, for example the method, results and conclusions (Andrade, 2011), which was actually done by the researchers. This is imperative to make it easy for readers to conclude what the research is about. On the other hand, flaws have been made present, the statement of further research being required may suggest to the reader that the results have no meaning due to the importance behind the statement made. An objective was put forward in the introduction. This is essential in the study of variables (Barrass, 1978), which is why researchers demonstrate a direct approach to readers. This can give readers confidence that researchers have a direction in which they are heading. Reference was made to research carried out by other researchers. This is important because it shows previous work done by the researcher and how it can impact the researcher's current work (Kennett, 2014). A case study is a comprehensive account of a single individual (Thomas, 2016). However, the problem that can be noticed is that the case of a single individual cannot be equal to that of all other members of the population, hence a decrease in the validity of the population. (Shuttleworth, 2009). Additionally, a pilot study consists of smaller studies that take place *add ref* that allow researchers to identify errors that have been made and rectify them (Leon, Davis, & Kraemer, 2011). This would be beneficial for researchers because there would be less risk of defects, they would have the knowledge and would know not to make the same mistakes in their research; as this would reduce the credibility of the research. Additionally, a purpose was provided as to why the research was conducted, as no previous research had compared the effectiveness of exercise programs in relation to the management of lateral elbow tendinopathy. This is essential because it demonstrates that other researchers have studied in similar areas (Brian Haynes, 2006), but it also indicates how previous research can be considered and implemented in current research (Agnoli, n.d. ). A parallel group design was used involving a single-center randomized trial; It can be analyzed that participants were assigned to treatment based on random assignment. (Stasinopoulos and Stasinopoulos, 2016). This is advantageous because random allocation reduces the risk of bias (Pannucci and Wilkins, 2011); simultaneously while reducing the chances of order effects, such as being tired or showing signs of boredom leading to false conclusions. An independent variable alongside a dependent variable was not provided. Such variables should be evident in theresearch (Babbie, 2008). Indeed, readers would find it difficult to understand what is being changed and measured. The mention of variables should make it easy for the reader to understand the approach the researchers are trying to adopt. As this does not happen, it can be seen that fundamental aspects of the research are ignored, thereby diminishing the validity of the research. As this research was conducted in Greece, it can be assumed that the majority, if not all, of the participants are from that country. This is a limiting factor because research may argue that there is a decrease in population validity; because the results are limited to those of the sample (Houser, 1998). Additionally, the results may not be replicable in another country (Kirk and Miller, 2005), which reduces the reliability of the research. No details were provided regarding the participants, for example, the researchers did not indicate the gender of the participants or their occupation. This is a weakness of the study because gender may be more susceptible to lateral elbow tendinopathy (Woo, Renström, & Arnoczky, 2007). Additionally, occupations may have a direct influence on the development of lateral elbow tendinopathy, such as using a job where the wrist is excessively used. Specific details must therefore be provided as a relationship can be recognized and taken into consideration. As a specific gender or profession is more susceptible to this, it would affect the overall validity of the research. It was announced in the results section that the participants were amateur tennis players. It can be argued that the results might not apply to individuals different from tennis players. As such, the results are limited to those of the study participants. Therefore, this decreases the overall external validity of this research (Trochim, Donnelly, and Arora, 2016). Additionally, a small sample of 34 participants was illustrated. This is problematic because the participants were divided into three groups, meaning that the subjects could not have been distributed evenly across the groups. The research findings cannot be generalized and lack validity and reliability because the sample size was too small (Walliman, Donnelly, and Arora, 2015); 34 tennis players do not reflect the general population. The measurement tools used in the research were the visual analog scale, to measure pain and function was also measured using pain-free grip strength. The visual analog scale is subjective, because people have different levels of pain tolerance. As such, conclusively stating that the results would be relevant to everyone due to individual experiences of pain is not particularly good ongoing research. Therefore, due to its subjective nature, its validity for the population is lower (Yang and Tsui, 2002). On the other hand, it is a commonly used scale in research; it can therefore be said that it has advantages and is an appropriate scale to apply (Bijur, Silver and Gallagher, 2001). Pain-free grip strength was another measurement tool applied by the researchers. This was a valid tool to use as it is also well recognized in research *add ref.* Throughout the research, participants had performed it three times with a minute of rest between each attempt *add ref. ref.*. This reinforces the idea that the measurement tool is well known, but it also indicates that there was a good, valid thought process behind the reasoning why the researchers did it. Now, he highlights the clinical justification for hisuse ; as such, it can be demonstrated that, through clinical reasoning, the research and results are credible. Insufficient detail was given about why the researchers did specific things, for example 3 out of 15 replicates. The minute details provided can leave the reader confused because essential aspects of the research are not explained; now this may disengage a reader *add ref* This further re-establishes the fact that research may have reduced validity, but it may also have reduced credibility. Finally, informed consent was given by the participants. this demonstrates that the research meets ethical guidelines, it is now considered ethically appropriate and can increase its credibility. *add ref* In turn, if the research were to have more credibility, more researchers would be interested in it, but it would also allow the reader to understand that harm in any form, for example mental or physical harm, was caused to participants *add ref*. Acknowledging that no harm was caused to participants allows the research to gain acceptance by the general public. *add ref* Results: One error found in the research was that no hypotheses were made. A hypothesis is a statement that predicts a connection between variables *add ref*. However, eliminating a hypothesis does not result in any research direction for readers. *add ref* Therefore, in doing so, readers remain doubtful about the research; potentially disengaging them *add ref* The researchers performed a paired t-test which is a statistical test. This choice of test is appropriate because it allows researchers to make comparisons between their *add ref* data sets; Comparisons were made between post-treatment improvements as well as with the pre-treatment baseline. Conclusion that the t-test meets the criteria for what it proposes to do. The paired t-test works in conjunction with the significance level of 0.05 and the p-value of 0.0005. The p-value must be equal to or less than the 0.05 significance level. Doing so would allow researchers to conclude that there is a statistically significant result *add red*. Theoretically, this is a significant result, but on the other hand, due to the lack of identification of a hypothesis, it can be summarized that no null or experimental hypothesis is accepted or rejected. In turn, research findings may have lower validity, decreasing their public acceptance. *add ref* A significance level of 0.05 is widely used in research *add ref* which is not very sensitive due to the possibility of causing mortality. Sensitive searches must be equal to or less than 0.01 to be classified as meaningful data. *add ref.* Gender bias was perceived in this research; this was mainly due to the treatment groups containing more females than males, therefore one gender is not properly embodied *add ref.* Additionally, the findings of the results reduced the population validity, meaning that the results do not necessarily reflect the general population *add ref.* Discussion: A definitive statement affirming the need for further research was highlighted by the researcher. This was illustrated when the researchers stated that future well-designed studies were needed to confirm the results of the current trial. Such a statement perfectly illustrates the researchers' uncertainty about their own conclusions. *Add ref* Thus, uncertainty can be.