/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none} Problem 24 In a 2018 study, researchers inv... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

In a 2018 study, researchers investigated the effect of the drug alteplase in the treatment of stroke patients (Thomalla et al. 2018). Patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous alteplase or a placebo. The patients' neurological function was assessed 90 days after treatment. Of the 246 patients who received alteplase, 131 had a positive neurological outcome. Of the 244 patients who received a placebo, 102 had a positive neurological outcome. a. Was this an observational study or a controlled experiment? Explain. b. Find the percentage in each group that had a positive neurological outcome 90 days after treatment. c. Researchers performed a test to determine if there was a significant difference in the proportion of positive neurological outcomes between the treatment and control groups. The p-value for the test is \(0.003 .\) Based on a \(0.05\) significance level, choose the correct conclusion: i. Researchers have shown that alteplase may be an effective treatment for stroke patients. ii. Researchers have not shown that alteplase may be an effective treatment for stroke patients.

Short Answer

Expert verified
a. This was a controlled experiment as patients were randomly assigned to receive either the drug or a placebo. b. Approximately 53.25% of the group that received alteplase had a positive neurological outcome, while about 41.8% of the group that received placebo had a positive outcome. c. The p-value of the study, 0.003, is less than the significance level of 0.05, hence researchers have statistically shown that alteplase may be an effective treatment for stroke patients.

Step by step solution

01

Identifying the type of study

Observe the way the experiment was conducted. If the researchers randomly assigned the patients into two groups, one receiving the actual drug and the other receiving a placebo, this indicates a controlled experiment. Hence, this was a controlled experiment.
02

Computing the Percentage of Positive Outcomes

Find the ratio of positive outcomes to the total number of patients for both groups. Multiply by 100 to represent as a percentage. For the group that received alteplase, \(\frac{131}{246} * 100 \approx 53.25 \% \). For the group that received the placebo, \(\frac{102}{244}* 100 \approx 41.8 \% \) .
03

Interpreting the P-Value

A P-value is the probability that the results of another experiment of the same size and structure will deviate as much or more from the expected results if the null hypothesis were true. A P-value less than 0.05 (or whatever our alpha, the significance level, is set to) means the null hypothesis is rejected, indicating the difference seen is statistically different. The P-value 0.003 is less than 0.05, hence it indicates that the difference in the outcome for the group that received alteplase and the one that received a placebo is significant. Therefore, the researchers have shown that alteplase may be an effective treatment for stroke patients.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91Ó°ÊÓ!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Random Assignment
In scientific research, random assignment is a vital aspect of controlled experiments. It involves randomly distributing participants into different groups to ensure each group is comparable. This process helps eliminate bias and guarantees that any differences between groups are due to the treatment being tested, rather than pre-existing differences. In the alteplase study, patients were randomly assigned to either receive the drug or a placebo.
This randomization ensures that personal variables, like age or severity of the stroke, do not skew the results.
  • Increases the reliability of the results.
  • Promotes balanced groups by chance.
  • Ensures that differences in outcomes are attributed to the treatment.
By using random assignment, researchers can confidently use statistical methods to evaluate treatment effectiveness without being concerned about extraneous variables affecting the outcome.
Statistical Significance
Statistical significance helps us understand if the results from an experiment are likely due to the treatment or just random chance. It boils down to a threshold set by researchers (often 0.05) to determine the likelihood of errors in the conclusions. In this context, the significance level helps decide if alteplase truly impacts neurological outcomes for stroke patients.
If the p-value from the experiment is below the threshold, the results are deemed statistically significant. This means it's unlikely the observed difference between groups occurred just by chance. Thus, it supports the notion that the treatment (alteplase) made a real impact.
  • Provides confidence in research findings.
  • Helps inform decision-making in clinical settings.
  • Assists in distinguishing between effective and ineffective treatments.
Statistical significance, in the alteplase study, allowed researchers to conclude with high confidence that the drug may be beneficial.
P-Value Analysis
The p-value is a statistical measure used to assess the evidence against the null hypothesis. It indicates the probability of obtaining results as extreme as those observed, given that the null hypothesis is true. In simpler terms, it tells us how likely our findings are due to randomness.
In the alteplase study, the p-value was 0.003, which is far below the common significance level of 0.05. A low p-value, like 0.003, suggests that the observed effect is strong and unlikely caused by random fluctuation. It allows researchers to reject the null hypothesis that there is no difference in treatment outcomes between the groups.
  • Quantifies the strength of the evidence against the null hypothesis.
  • Helps defend or refute the research hypothesis.
  • Aids in confirming the effectiveness of a treatment.
P-value analysis is critical for drawing conclusions in studies, ensuring the results are not dismissed as mere coincidences.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Music and Divergent Thinking In a 2017 study published at PLOS.org, researchers investigated the effect of music on creativity (Ritter and Ferguson 2017). Subjects were recruited for the study using an online research participation system at a university. Four pieces of music were selected with different emotional tones: calm, happy, sad, and anxious. Subjects were randomly assigned to listen to one of these four pieces or to a group that listened to no music (silence). After 15 seconds of music (or silence) subjects were given a task that assessed their creativity and divergent thinking. Read the excerpts from the study abstract and answer the following questions. Results: Our main hypothesis was that listening to happy music, as compared to a silence control condition, facilitates divergent thinking. An independent-samples \(t\) -test was conducted to compare the happy music condition with the silence control condition on overall divergent thinking (ODT). There was a significant difference in ODT between the happy music \((\mathrm{M}=93.87, \mathrm{SD}=32.02)\) and silence \((\mathrm{M}=76.10\), \(\mathrm{SD}=32.62\) ) conditions, \(\mathrm{t}(57)=2.110, \mathrm{p}=.039\). The results suggest that listening to happy music increases performance on overall divergent thinking. a. Identify the treatment variable and the response variable. b. Was this a controlled experiment or an observational study? Explain. c. Can you conclude from that listening happy music enhances divergent thinking? Why or why not?

Suppose that a new nicotine patch to help people quit smoking was developed and tested. Smokers voluntarily entered the study and were randomly assigned either the nicotine patch or a placebo patch. Suppose that a larger percentage of those using the nicotine patch were able to stop smoking. a. Can we generalize widely to a large group? Why or why not? b. Can we infer causality? Why or why not?

A college administrator wants to determine whether the professors at the college are doing a good job. Each professor teaches multiple classes, and so for each professor, one of his or her classes is randomly chosen, and all the students are surveyed to find out their opinion of the teacher. What kind of sampling is this?

Suppose you want to compare the effectiveness of the flu vaccine in preventing the flu using one of two different forms: nasal spray versus injection. Suppose you have 60 subjects available of different ages, and you suspect that age might have an effect on the outcome. Assume there are 20 children aged 2 to 15,20 people aged 16 to 30, and 20 people aged 31 to 49 . a. Identify the treatment variable and the response variable. b. Describe a simple randomized design (no blocking) to test the whether the injection or the nasal spray is more effective. Explain in detail how to assign people to treatment groups. c. Describe a blocked design (blocking by age) to test whether the injection or the nasal spray is more effective. Explain in detail how you will assign people to treatment groups. d. What advantage does the blocked design have?

A random sample of 50 college first-year students (out of a total of 1000 first-years) was obtained from college records using systematic sampling. Half of those students had a campus tour with a sophomore student, and half had a tour with an instructor. The tour guide was determined randomly by coin flip for each student. Suppose that those with the student guide rated their experience higher than those with the instructor guide. a. Can you generalize to other first-year students at this college? Explain. b. Can you infer causality from this study? Explain.

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.