In the paper’s Abstract, it was better to mention in detail the family members who

participated in the study. Also a description should have been provided on the type of the intervention. For example, it had to be made clear wether the intervention was done on individual subjects or was performed on a group on subjects. In Materials and Methods section, the type of the study, which was a one-group semi-experimental pretest/post-test design,2 was not mentioned. Moreover, in the Acknowledgements section, instead of using “investigation”, Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical or “study”, the word “survey” was used, which is a different type of study by itself. No description was provided on the method of counseling. It is not known if the counseling were conducted for single individuals or for a group of individuals. The theoretical basis of intervention, which should have been thoroughly explained in introduction section as well as time, number Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical and frequency of sessions were not clear as well. Moreover, it was not clear if the counseling sessions for children, mothers, fathers, siblings and spouse were the same. Reliability coefficients for Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical subscales of the questionnaire were not

mentioned. Also, the paper could have used more accurate ways to validate the questionnaire rather than using face and content validity. As it can be seen in the attitude section of the Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical questionnaire (table 2), instead of evaluating the families’ attitudes toward their patients, items number 2, 3, and 4 evaluated the participant’s attitude

toward the show that was presented at Behavioral Counseling Center. It would have been better if the attitude dimension of the questionnaire had been measured by rating scales using appropriate scoring system such as the Likert scale. The age range of the participants was 27-53 years; therefore, children as the patients’ family members could not have been included in the study as participants. In the results section, the frequency and percentage of spouses, which were a sizeable portion of the participants, were not mentioned. Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical Since there are no appropriate non-parametric tests for analyzing most of the findings in behavioral sciences research, it is recommended to use parametric tests with strong statistical power, even when the data are discrete (items 8 and 9 in table 1) and do not meet the criteria of why normality of distribution and homogeneity of variance. 3 In the section of discussion, there was no an explanation as to why the study was better than similar click here studies, which had used more accurate designs. Moreover, it was not possible to conclude from the study that counseling had an explanatory role, although such a role had been confirmed in many controlled randomized trials. The paper indicated that family members were assumed as one individual in the processes.