Introduction

In the elder people, ischemic heart disease (IHD) and other cardiovascular illnesses result in a notable rise in morbidity and mortality (Mozaffarian et al., 2016). The world's health is seriously threatened by this. Research on cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment options is essential as life expectancy rises globally, with a particular emphasis on enhancing the health of those 65 years of age and older.  Global healthcare systems and people's quality of life are significantly impacted by the frequency of cardiovascular diseases, especially IHD (Skrzypek et al., 2018). Understanding the role that physical exercise plays in protecting older adults against ischemic heart disease is crucial, especially in light of the world's population ageing at an unprecedented rate.

Are you struggling to keep up with the demands of your academic journey? Don't worry, we've got your back! Exam Question Bank is your trusted partner in achieving academic excellence for all kind of technical and non-technical subjects.

Our comprehensive range of academic services is designed to cater to students at every level. Whether you're a high school student, a college undergraduate, or pursuing advanced studies, we have the expertise and resources to support you.

To connect with expert and ask your query click here Exam Question Bank

We'll use a range of research techniques, such as surveys and Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) in this report.  By using a multimodal approach, we hope to fill in the current knowledge gaps about the intricate links between senior cardiovascular health and frequency of exercise. We hope to advance the global conversation about ischemic heart disease prevention and healthy ageing by sharing this substantial research, which will ultimately improve the lives of older adults everywhere.

Method 1

The first approach we'll take to address our question is the Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT). A Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) is a research strategy that tries to determine the causal linkages between an intervention and its effects by randomly assigning participants to various groups (Khan et al., 2020). The right amount of physical activity on a regular basis to lower the risk of ischemic heart disease in people over 65 needs to be determined via an RCT. In this scenario, participants would be assigned at random to one of three groups according to how often they exercise, five groups according to how often they exercise, or a control group that would not engage in any kind of physical activity. Subsequently, during a predefined length of time, the impact of each frequency on the incidence of ischemic heart disease would be meticulously assessed and compared.

With regard to the frequency of exercise in this population, our strategy closes the research gap, takes into consideration any confounding variables, and produces strong evidence of causation. According to Winzer et al. (2018), the frequency of exercise is an independent variable, while the incidence of IHD is a dependent variable. Causal links between the two variables can be established thanks to RCTs' high internal validity. This method enables the manipulation of multiple confounding factors. RCTs can need a lot of resources, and the ability to place participants in no-exercise conditions may be constrained by ethical issues. Maintaining compliance with the recommended workout frequency could present additional difficulties.

Method 2

Through the systematic gathering of data via self-reported answers to a series of questions, surveys offer insights into people's beliefs, actions, and experiences. Surveys are a useful tool for learning about the present exercise habits of people over 65 and how they relate to the occurrence of ischemic heart disease (Indraratna et al., 2020). Data on participants' age, current physical activity levels, frequency of exercise, and history of ischemic heart disease would be gathered by a survey questionnaire. The research can investigate population-wide trends, spot patterns, and produce new understandings of the connection between exercise frequency and health outcomes by distributing this survey to a representative sample.

Surveys fill a research gap by offering a thorough picture of the current state of physical activity in this population. They are effective in reaching a large number of participants, which makes them well-suited for comprehending the broader context and subtleties of exercise habits in the target demographic (Mozaffarian et al., 2016). Through the use of surveys, a large sample size of participants' data can be gathered to provide an overview of current views and behaviours. This approach can yield useful data on population-wide patterns and is quite inexpensive. Since self-reporting is the primary source of survey data, biases relating to participants' recall and reporting of their exercise routines may be introduced. The depth and precision of more controlled experimental designs might not be present in the data.

Discussion

Merits, drawbacks, and ethical implications

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are widely acknowledged for their high internal validity, making them the gold standard for establishing causality and providing robust evidence regarding the impact of interventions (Chen, 2010). Through random assignment, RCTs afford researchers control over confounding variables, minimizing biases and enabling the isolation of the specific effects of exercise frequency on the incidence of ischemic heart disease (Mozaffarian et al., 2016). However, the method comes with inherent drawbacks. RCTs are resource-intensive, demanding meticulous planning, recruitment efforts, and extensive follow-up, which can be both time-consuming and costly. Additionally, ethical concerns may arise, particularly when assigning participants to a no-exercise control group, a consideration heightened in older populations where the denial of an intervention may raise ethical challenges.

Surveys, on the other hand, offer distinct merits in the context of investigating exercise habits and their relationship to ischemic heart disease incidence (Cium?rnean et al., 2021). Surveys are lauded for their efficiency in data collection, proving to be a cost-effective method suitable for obtaining information from a large and diverse sample. Providing a broader perspective, surveys capture a spectrum of opinions and behaviors, offering a comprehensive view of exercise habits among individuals over 65. Despite these advantages, surveys have drawbacks, including the potential for self-report bias (Yubero-Serrano et al., 2020). Responses may be influenced by factors such as recall and social desirability bias, impacting the accuracy of the data collected. Additionally, while surveys can establish associations, they fall short of proving causation, limiting their ability to definitively address the research question.

Both RCTs and surveys necessitate careful ethical considerations. Informed consent, confidentiality, and participant well-being are paramount for both methods. Ethical challenges specific to RCTs may arise due to random assignment, especially concerning the potential denial of an intervention to the control group (Davis et al., 2000). Striking a balance between the methodological strengths and ethical implications is imperative when selecting the most suitable approach for addressing the research question on the optimal frequency of physical activity for reducing ischemic heart disease incidence in individuals over 65.

Both methods require ethical considerations regarding informed consent, confidentiality, and the well-being of participants. RCTs may pose ethical challenges related to random assignment and the potential denial of an intervention to the control group.

Participation by Specific Communities and Stakeholders

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) require cooperation between healthcare providers, exercise specialists, and older persons when it comes to the engagement of certain communities and stakeholders. This cooperation is necessary to guarantee successful recruitment and adherence to the intervention (Davis et al., 2000). In order to maintain ethical standards in RCTs, comprehensive informed consent procedures are essential. In order to ensure that the study is influenced by real-world experiences and problems, this cooperative network is essential for efficient recruitment and adherence to the intervention. Furthermore, strong informed consent procedures are essential in randomised controlled trials, highlighting the moral issues related to participant involvement.

Conversely, surveys necessitate cooperation with elder centres, community organisations, and healthcare providers in order to ensure a representative sample. Getting relevant replies becomes dependent on using accessible survey formats and maintaining clear lines of communication (Skrzypek et al., 2018). This cooperative strategy makes it easier to gather relevant data by capturing a wide range of beliefs and actions regarding the exercise habits of people 65 and older.

In summary, both RCTs and surveys necessitate active collaboration with specific communities and stakeholders, underscoring the importance of tailored strategies to engage relevant partners. Whether working closely with healthcare professionals and exercise specialists in RCTs or partnering with community organizations and healthcare providers in surveys, the involvement of stakeholders ensures the research is contextually grounded and ethically sound.

Practical challenges

When it comes to real-world difficulties, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have long lead times because of the complex procedures involved in participant selection, intervention delivery, and evaluation. High economic expenditures related to intervention components, participant compensation, and staffing needs further jeopardise the method's viability (Skrzypek et al., 2018). In terms of economic and practicality, RCTs have significant financial implications. The execution of the intervention, participant compensation, and staffing requirements are some of the factors that contribute to these expenses. The monetary commitment needed for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) can be problematic, especially when taking resource availability and budgetary restrictions into account.

However, surveys provide a quicker method for gathering and analysing data, which makes them a more efficient and generally less expensive choice. Even though surveys also need resources for distribution and analysis, they are frequently more effective in these areas than randomised controlled trials (Mozaffarian et al., 2016). Conversely, surveys are typically more economical. Even though they do need resources for analysis and distribution, altogether, they usually have a less heavy financial load than RCTs. Surveys are a viable option because of their relative cost-effectiveness, which makes them appealing especially in research settings with limited resources.

In summary, the choice between RCTs and surveys should carefully consider the trade-offs associated with timelines, feasibility, and economic costs. While RCTs provide rigorous evidence, they demand a substantial investment of time and resources. Surveys, with their faster timelines and cost-effectiveness, offer a pragmatic alternative, balancing the need for efficiency with the imperative of producing valuable insights.

Communicating findings to relevant end-users

When it comes to communicating findings to relevant end-users, RCTs afford the opportunity for clear communication of causality and actionable insights. Tailored messages for healthcare professionals and policymakers can be crafted, facilitating the implementation of evidence-based interventions (Indraratna et al., 2020). Surveys, however, emphasize associations and population trends. Consequently, communication strategies should be targeted towards the broader public, community organizations, and healthcare providers to disseminate insights derived from the survey data effectively (Barton et al., 2014). The choice between RCTs and surveys should consider not only their methodological strengths and drawbacks but also the practicalities of engaging stakeholders, managing timelines, addressing economic costs, and tailoring communication strategies to the intended audience.

The choice between RCTs and surveys involves trade-offs. RCTs offer high internal validity but come with ethical and resource challenges. Surveys provide a broader perspective but may lack the causal clarity of RCTs (Chen, 2010). Combining both methods in a mixed-methods approach could offer a more comprehensive understanding, leveraging the strengths of each method while mitigating their respective limitations. Ultimately, the chosen methods should align with the research question's nuances, ethical considerations, and practical constraints.

Conclusion

In summary, a combination of both methods provides the most comprehensive approach when evaluating the benefits and drawbacks of surveys and Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) in relation to our research question regarding the best frequency of physical activity for lowering the incidence of ischemic heart disease in people over 65. RCTs are great at proving causation and high internal validity, but they have drawbacks due to their resource-intensive design and certain ethical issues, particularly when it comes to not giving a control group an intervention. Conversely, surveys effectively record a range of viewpoints and actions, providing a more comprehensive understanding of exercise habits.  Thus, the best course of action would be to do a preliminary RCT to carefully examine causation, then add a survey component to record the various exercise routines and mindsets that the target population possesses. Combining these two would provide a more comprehensive knowledge and make it easier to produce evidence-based guidelines for the ideal frequency of physical activity for people over 65 in order to lower the prevalence of ischemic heart disease.

Are you struggling to keep up with the demands of your academic journey? Don't worry, we've got your back! Exam Question Bank is your trusted partner in achieving academic excellence for all kind of technical and non-technical subjects.

Our comprehensive range of academic services is designed to cater to students at every level. Whether you're a high school student, a college undergraduate, or pursuing advanced studies, we have the expertise and resources to support you.

To connect with expert and ask your query click here Exam Question Bank