The article “The Epidemiology of Chronic Pain in the Community” investigated chronic pain by relying on random sampling methods within a community. It reveals that cases of chronic illness frequently occur in older people than in young ones (Elliot et al., 1999). Also, the article “Framingham heart study: the first 20 years” investigates the contributions of epidemiolocal approaches in examining and treating heart disease (Oppenheimer, 2010). NDP-prepared nurses should therefore have skills in reviewing such articles because they are essential in drawing conclusions and implementing research-based solutions to ensure proper disease control in society. The article “The Epidemiology of Chronic Pain in the Community” has various strengths, which include that it succeeded in justifying the spread of chronic illness in society. In explaining the spread of chronic conditions, the study has sampled both age, gender, employment, and the demographic status of the people (Elliot et al., 1999). They are assumed to be social determinants that serve to predict chronic pain in various surroundings within society. Therefore, the article collected and analyzed data from multiple groups in the community to quantify and demonstrate the prevalence of the chronic disorder. One of the strengths of the article “Framingham Heart Study: The First 20 Years” is that it succeeded in introducing research methods that would assist in investigating non-cardiovascular diseases. The report has also presented the challenges and issues that healthcare service providers encounter while conducting research (Oppenheimer, 2010). Another strength of the article is that the author convinces the Framingham society to support the study by assisting in data collection. Therefore, it has led to the development of experimental methods in the health sector. Elliot et al. (1999) article failed to collect reliable data from the participants targeted in the study. Some of the questionnaires were not delivered successfully because of incorrect recipient addresses. Also, the researchers did not consider the number of responses collected from the sampled individuals when conducting data analysis. On the other hand, “Framingham Heart Study: The First 20 Years” had a single weakness where the research received funding from several authorities (Oppenheimer, 2010). Therefore, multiple investors in the project are thought to have had different interests and could interfere with the research process. The potential source of bias from the two epidemiological studies is that they failed to consider all possible variances. The studies rely on samples that are not a recommendable presentation of the entire population. Researchers should choose a reasonable selection to represent the whole population (Friis & sellers, 2020). The Article “Framingham Heart Study: The First 20 Years” utilizes a self-selected group as a data collection method, while in the other article, “The Epidemiology of Chronic Pain in the Community,” the researcher did not include individuals aged below 25 years in the study. Therefore, utilizing a collective approach and giving each individual an equal opportunity when collecting data could help avoid such