1 views

Uploaded by Bo Guan

midterm

- 2 Descriptive Statistic
- Refference 1 Biostatistic Principles of Use of Biostatistics in Research
- Effectiveness of loyalty cards
- AUK-CONDOR Instructions for Authors
- SPSS
- When to use it
- B-45
- Bajaj adv
- 169
- Outliers
- Outliers
- Do Z-Score and Current Ratio Have Ability to Predict. Bankruptcy
- outliers.pdf
- Paper SD 18
- bman12
- Chapter 11
- Statistics for Support Slides
- ajbmr_v01n02_02
- Tugas Mira AP 4 A
- Output

You are on page 1of 7

Undieh Midterm

1. Question 1

a. Scientific/Research Hypothesis-The purpose of this study is to look at whether wheelchair maneuvering caused different pressures on the ischial tuberosity in individuals with lower spinal

cord injury versus healthy controls.

b. Test Hypotheses

i. H0: pressureUnderLIT (SCI) = pressureUnderLIT (control)

ii. H1 : pressureUnderLIT (SCI) ≠ pressureUnderLIT (control)

c. Test Data and Assumption

i. The data consists of two group of subjects who had their pressure under LIT(left ischial tuberosity) taken. Therefore, the independent variable is “group” (spinal cord injury vs

control) and the dependent variable is the pressure. Pressure is a continuous scalar variable, hence it can be assumed to be normally distributed in the population from which the

sampled data was generated.

d. Test statistics and decision rule

i. Given that normality of pressure can be assumed, there are two groups to be compared, an independent samples t-test is selected for the data, and will be evaluated at an alpha

value=0.05.

e. Calculations

Figure 1a.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of

Variances t-test for Equality of Means

95% Confidence Interval of the

Mean Std. Error Difference

F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper

pressureUnderLeftIschialT Equal variances assumed .564 .462 -.569 18 .576 -7.00000 12.29444 -32.82967 18.82967

uberosity Equal variances not -.569 15.832 .577 -7.00000 12.29444 -33.08554 19.08554

assumed

Equality of variances, homogenous of variance assumption. This shows that they are the same samples because P values of the Levene’s Test is greater than .05.

Assume that the variances are the same. Accept the null hypothesis. Variance do not make a difference.

f. Statistical decision

i. The calculated t-value is -.569 which for 7 df equates a significance level of >.576 equates a significance level of .576. At the .05 alpha, the difference between the SCI and the

control group is not significant. (figure 1a)

ii. H0: pressureUnderLIT (SCI) = pressureUnderLIT (control) ; Cannot reject H0 (p>.05)

iii. H1 : pressureUnderLIT (SCI) ≠ pressureUnderLIT (control); Reject H1 (p>.05)

g. Scientific conclusion

i. There is no significant effect of spinal cord injury on the pressure on left ischial tuberosity during wheel chair use.

2. Question 2

a. Scientific/Research Hypothesis-The purpose of this study is to look at whether bone strength is different among three age groups, the young (19-49), the middle-aged (50-69), and the

elderly (70 and above).

b. Test Hypotheses

i. H0: there is no difference in bone strength between the young, middle aged, and elderly.

Bo Guan

Undieh Midterm

ii. H1 : there is a difference in bone strength between the young, middle aged, and elderly.

i. The data consists of three group of subjects whose femurs were collected from their cadevors and subjected to testing. The force to fracture the bone was measured in newtons.

Therefore the group is the independent variable(young, middle-aged, elderly) and the force needed to break the bone is the dependent variable. Bone strength, as measured by the

fore to fracture a bone, is a continuous scalar variable, hence it can be assumed to be normally distributed in the population from which the sampled data was generated.

d. Test statistics and decision rule

i. Given that normality of force to break a bone can be assumed, there are three groups to be compared, one independent variable, and one dependent variable, a one way ANOVA will

be used and evaluated at an alpha value=0.05.

e. Calculations

Figure 2a.

ANOVA

forcetoFractureBone

Sum of Mean

Squares df Square F Sig.

Between 11799.239 2 5899.619 9.256 .001

Groups

Within Groups 16571.983 26 637.384

Total 28371.222 28

f. Statistical decision

i. The ANOVA test showed that between the three groups, there is a F value of 9.256 at a significance value of .0001. At the .05 alpha, the difference between groups are significant.

(figure 2a)

ii. H0: there is no difference in bone strength between the young, middle aged, and elderly; Reject (p<.01)

iii. H1 : there is a difference in bone strength between the young, middle aged, and elderly. Cannot reject (p<.01)

g. Scientific conclusion

h. There is a difference in bone strength between the young (19-49), the middle-aged (50-69), and the elderly (70 and above)

3. Krugs Wallis

a. Scientific/Research Hypothesis-The purpose of this study is to look at whether there is a difference in pack years among the patients who have gone on the nicotine patch, bupropion

treatment, or both. The "pack years" is the average number of packs the subject smoked per day multiplied by the number of years the subject had smoked.

b. Test Hypotheses

i. H0: there is no difference in pack years between the three groups( nicotine patch, bupropion, both nicotine patch and bupropion)

ii. H1: there is no difference in pack years between the three groups( nicotine patch, bupropion, both nicotine patch and bupropion)

c. Test Data and Assumption

Bo Guan

Undieh Midterm

i. The data consists of three group of subjects (nicotine path, bupropion, both nicotine patch and bupropion) who reported their pack years as an estimate of their tobacco use.

Therefore, the independent variable is “group” category, and the dependent variable is the “pack years”. Since the patients self-assigned to treatment groups according to personal

preference and not random assignment, the pack years cannot be assumed to be normally distributed.

d. Test statistics and decision rule

i. The Kolmogorov Smirnov test showed the pack years to not be normally distributed. (3a) Given that there are three groups, one independent variable, one dependent variable, and

no normality, a Kruskal-Wallis test will be used.

e. Calculations

Figure 3a.

Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

packYears .068 164 .063 .978 164 .011

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Figure 3b.

Test Statisticsa,b

packYears

Kruskal-Wallis 11.664

H

df 2

Asymp. Sig. .003

a. Kruskal Wallis Test

b. Grouping Variable:

smokingCessationGroups

f. The calculated H value for Kruskal Wallis is 11.664 pack years with a significant figure of .003. At the .05 alpha, therefore, the difference between the three groups are significant.

Therefore: (figure 3b.)

i. H0: there is no difference in pack years between the three groups; Reject null hypothesis (p<.05)

ii. H1: there is no difference in pack years between the three groups. Cannot reject H1 since (p<.05)

g. There are differences in pack years among the different treatment groups.

Bo Guan

Undieh Midterm

4. Question 4

a. Scientific/Research Hypothesis-The purpose of this study is to look at whether a stress reduction program was effective in reducing anxiety patients’ stress as measured by the Hamilton

Anxiety Rating Scale. The hypothesis is that the scores should decrease from pre treatment to post treatment and decrease further three months after follow up.

b. Test Hypotheses t

i. H0: there is no difference between HARS scores between initial evaluation, pretreatment, post treatment, and 3 months follow up.

ii. H1: there is a difference between HARS scores from initial evaluation, pretreatment, post treatment, and 3 month follow up of the anxiety patients.

iii. H2: pretreatment>posttreatment

iv. H3: post treatment> 3 months follow up

i. The data consists of one group of patients who had their Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale score taken at four different points in time including the initial evaluation, pretreatment,

post-treatment, and three-month follow up. . Therefore, the independent variable is the “time of measurement” (initial, pre, post, 3 months) and the dependent variable is the HARS

score. This scale is a continuous distribution within the studied population. The selection of patients was also random. Hence the dependent variable can be assumed to be normally

distributed.

i. Given that there is one independent variable, one dependent variable, one group of subjects but multiple repeated tests on the same group, and normality of the HARS scale, a

repeated ANOVA is used at alpha of .05.

e. Calculations

Figure 4a.

Multivariate Testsa

Hypothesis Partial Eta

Effect Value F df Error df Sig. Squared

pointsinTime Pillai's Trace .857 21.996b 3.000 11.000 .000 .857

b

Wilks' Lambda .143 21.996 3.000 11.000 .000 .857

b

Hotelling's Trace 5.999 21.996 3.000 11.000 .000 .857

b

Roy's Largest 5.999 21.996 3.000 11.000 .000 .857

Root

a. Design: Intercept

Within Subjects Design: pointsinTime

Bo Guan

Undieh Midterm

Figure 4b.

Pairwise Comparisons

Measure: HARS

Mean 95% Confidence Interval for

(I) (J) Difference (I- Std. Differenceb

pointsinTime pointsinTime J) Error Sig.b Lower Bound Upper Bound

1 2 3.429 2.496 .193 -1.963 8.820

3 12.500* 2.064 .000 8.041 16.959

*

4 14.500 2.550 .000 8.991 20.009

2 1 -3.429 2.496 .193 -8.820 1.963

*

3 9.071 2.074 .001 4.591 13.552

4 11.071* 1.595 .000 7.626 14.517

*

3 1 -12.500 2.064 .000 -16.959 -8.041

*

2 -9.071 2.074 .001 -13.552 -4.591

4 2.000 1.997 .335 -2.315 6.315

4 1 -14.500* 2.550 .000 -20.009 -8.991

*

2 -11.071 1.595 .000 -14.517 -7.626

3 -2.000 1.997 .335 -6.315 2.315

Based on estimated marginal means

*. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

b. Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Least Significant Difference (equivalent to no adjustments).

f. Given that the Wilk’s Lambda multivariate test showed that the F value between the four

groups as 21.99 with a significance value of .000, there is a high significance in difference

between the four groups. (figure 4a)

i. H0: there is no difference between HARS scores between initial evaluation,

pretreatment, post treatment, and 3 months follow up. Reject because p<.05

ii. H1: there is a difference between HARS scores from initial evaluation, pretreatment,

post treatment, and 3 month follow up of the anxiety patients. Cannot reject because

p<.05

iii. H2: pretreatment>posttreatment; looking at the Pairwise Comparisons table, the mean

for pretreatment is greater than the mean for posttreatment by 9.071 at a P value

of .001. H2 cannot be rejected. (figure 4b.)

iv. H3: post treatment> 3 months follow up; looking at the Pairwise Comparison table, the

mean for post treatment is greater than three months follow up at a P value of .335.

Since P>.05, this hypothesis has to be rejected.

g. The stress reduction program is effective in reducing the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale

immediately after treatment but does not exhibit further effect after a three month follow up.

Bo Guan

Undieh Midterm

5. Quesition 5

a. The study is to investigate the effect of ovalbumin sensitization and exposure of air, benzaldehyde and acetaldehyde on guinea pigs’ alveolar cell count. The hypothesis is that there is a

difference between the sensitization groups and the treatment groups. Another hypothesis is that there is interaction between sensitization and treatment.

b. Test Hypotheses t

i. H0: there is no difference in alveolar count between the different treatment groups (acetaldehyde, air, and benzaldehyde) and the different ovalbumin sensitization groups(sensitized

and not sensitized)

ii. H1: there is a difference in alveolar count between the different treatment groups (acetaldehyde, air, and benzaldehyde) and the different ovalbumin sensitization groups(sensitized

and not sensitized)

iii. H2: No Ovalbumin(alveolar count) ≠ Yes Ovalbumin (alveolar count)

iv. H3: post treatment acetaldehyde (alveolar count) ≠ post treatment (benzaldehyde)

v. H4: There is interaction between ovalbumin sensitization and treatment.

i. There are two independent variables here, ovalbumin sensitization and treatment type. They are independent variables because guinea pigs are separated into groups according to

these parameters. Both of these influence on the dependent variable which is the alveolar count. Alveolar count is a continuous scalar within the studied population. The selection of

patients was also random. Hence the dependent variable can be assumed to be normally distributed.

i. Given that there are two independent variables, one dependent variable, and normality of the alveolar count, a factorial Anova is used to test the hypothesis.

e.

Figure 5a.

Dependent Variable: alveolarCount

Type III Sum Mean

Source of Squares df Square F Sig.

a

Corrected Model 17503.336 5 3500.667 10.193 .000

Intercept 74020.271 1 74020.271 215.530 .000

Oversensitized 7906.174 1 7906.174 23.021 .000

Treatment 7688.635 2 3844.318 11.194 .000

Oversensitized * 1908.527 2 954.263 2.779 .078

Treatment

Error 10303.013 30 343.434

Total 101826.620 36

Corrected Total 27806.349 35

a. R Squared = .629 (Adjusted R Squared = .568)

Bo Guan

Undieh Midterm

f. i. H0: there is no difference in alveolar count between the different treatment groups (acetaldehyde, air, and benzaldehyde) and the different ovalbumin sensitization groups(sensitized and

not sensitized). Reject because the factorial ANOVA showed that the F value for the overall model is 10.19 with a significant figure of .000. This is less than .05 and means that there is

significant difference across the groups.

i. H1: there is a difference in alveolar count between the different treatment groups (acetaldehyde, air, and benzaldehyde) and the different ovalbumin sensitization groups(sensitized

and not sensitized). Cannot reject because the factorial ANOVA showed that the F value for the overall model is 10.19 with a significant figure of .000. This is less than .05 and

means that there is significant difference across the groups.

ii. H2: No Ovalbumin(alveolar count) ≠ Yes Ovalbumin (alveolar count) Cannot reject because the factorial ANOVA showed that the F value for the ovalbumin sensitization is 23.02

with a significant figure of .000. This is less than .05 and means that there is significant difference across the groups.

iii. H3: post treatment acetaldehydet( alveolar count) ≠ post treatment (benzaldehyde) Cannot reject because the factorial ANOVA showed that the F value for treatment is 11.19 with a

significant figure of .000. This is less than .05 and means that there is significant difference across the groups.

iv. H4: There is interaction between ovalbumin sensitization and treatment. Reject because the factorial ANOVA showed that the F value for ovalbumin sensitization* treatment is 2.78

with a significant figure of .078. This is more than .05 and means that there is no significant difference across the groups.

g. There is difference among the ovalbumin sensitized and nonsensitized outcomes. There is difference between the three different exposures. However, there is no interaction.

- 2 Descriptive StatisticUploaded byDea Vie Binius
- Refference 1 Biostatistic Principles of Use of Biostatistics in ResearchUploaded bystella pangestika
- Effectiveness of loyalty cardsUploaded byAmbica Prashar Mishra
- AUK-CONDOR Instructions for AuthorsUploaded byAlexChang
- SPSSUploaded bypepephyo
- When to use itUploaded byFajar Rudy Qimindra
- B-45Uploaded bywaseem
- Bajaj advUploaded byPunit Singh Sardar
- 169Uploaded byVanesa
- OutliersUploaded bymanuelq9
- OutliersUploaded byAman Mahajan
- Do Z-Score and Current Ratio Have Ability to Predict. BankruptcyUploaded byMIan Muzamil
- outliers.pdfUploaded byBagus Hadiwibowo
- Paper SD 18Uploaded byManoj Agravat
- bman12Uploaded byHazel Jane Punto
- Chapter 11Uploaded byJesse M. Massie
- Statistics for Support SlidesUploaded byFranco Ramiro
- ajbmr_v01n02_02Uploaded byKEUANGAN IAIN BATUSANGKAR
- Tugas Mira AP 4 AUploaded byguzennari
- OutputUploaded byZaidan
- Kids CareUploaded byAbhay Chauhan
- Chapter IVUploaded bycassha04
- end of year stats projectUploaded byapi-287059889
- pub49-h1Uploaded byVladimir Valdivia Llanca
- t-testpowerpointUploaded byapi-261665230
- A STUDY ON THE SATISFACTION LEVELS OF DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN TOURISTS WHO VISIT KERALA BEACHES.Uploaded byIJAR Journal
- OutputUploaded byHasan Mahsad
- Chi Square TestUploaded bySigei Leonard
- 7. Product and Process Comparisons.pdfUploaded byfandisetia
- W5INSE6220Uploaded byJaideep Singh

- ctsp 4 cervantes 4Uploaded byapi-287731576
- leadership and management in the nicuUploaded byapi-260053520
- Preparing Questions for a Qualitative Research InterviewUploaded byEmmanuel Cuasay Revilla
- Lesson PlanUploaded byAna-Maria Popovici
- Sass & Parnas - Self, Solipsism and Schizophrenic DelusionsUploaded byPhilip Reynor Jr.
- Sports Writing PowerpointUploaded byAriel Lalisan
- Fhinta PresentationUploaded byaudityaeros
- D&D 5th ed Vision cheatsheet.pdfUploaded byJoseph
- Jane Eyre in No Telephone to HeavenUploaded byEric Emer
- Case StudyUploaded byShazia Nawaz Bajwa
- Enduvo to Demonstrate That Anyone Can Create and Share AR/VR Content at IMSH Jan. 26-30 in San Antonio, TexasUploaded byPR.com
- Different Types of Sexual OrientationUploaded byPedro Lazaro O. Pineda
- Review of Intellectual ImposturesUploaded byanand_karthikeyan
- attitude vs actionUploaded byapi-308769064
- Synergetic Leadership TheoryUploaded bySam Charles
- psii aztecs and spanish unit planUploaded byapi-283598007
- What Is Religious Intercourse And Sexuality?Uploaded byMediums3901
- resumeeeeeUploaded byapi-253798381
- Ninja Selling Larry Kendall 2015Uploaded byvic
- sifdUploaded byapi-314654614
- slhs empty bowlsUploaded byapi-243556355
- HBLUploaded byNisar Akbar Khan
- assignment 1.pdfUploaded bymarikwat
- Stepping-Into-Spiritual-Oneness.pdfUploaded byTaulant Hoxha
- Research Proposal on UNIONISM AT PTCL & SSGC By Yasir Shehzad BUITEMSUploaded byYasir Afzal
- 1907 A military obituary for a German philosopher Eduard von Hartmann in Jahrbücher für deutsche Armee und MarineUploaded byVirgilio_Ilari
- Female Stereotypes in 21st Century News and Business MagazinesUploaded byCristi Ursea
- Disseration zaraUploaded bykashfi35
- The Incredible Power of Your ThoughtsUploaded bychannels
- Feminism and Christianity in Jane EyreUploaded byJoy Shin