/*! 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} 73SE Errors in filling prescriptions ... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

Errors in filling prescriptions A large number of preventable errors (e.g., overdoses, botched operations, misdiagnoses) are being made by doctors and nurses in U.S. hospitals. A study of a major metropolitan hospital revealed that of every 100 medications prescribed or dispensed, 1 was in error,

but only 1 in 500 resulted in an error that caused significant problems for the patient. It is known that the hospital prescribes and dispenses 60,000 medications per year.

  1. What is the expected proportion of errors per year at this hospital? The expected proportion of significant errors per year?
  2. Within what limits would you expect the proportion significant errors per year to fall?

Short Answer

Expert verified
  1. The expected proportion of errors per year at this hospital is 600 and the expected proportion of significant errors per year is 120.
  2. The proportion of significant errors per year falls between 0.00164 and 0.00236.

Step by step solution

01

Given information

There is a study of a major metropolitan hospital. The study revealed that in every 100 medications prescribed or dispensed, 1 is an error. But there is 1 error from a significant problem in every 500 medications. The hospital prescribed or dispensed 60000 medications per year.

02

Calculate the expected proportion

Consider the probability of having an error p=1100=0.01.

And the probability of having a significant error ps=1500=0.002.

a.

The expected proportion of error per year of the hospital is,

=np=600000.01=600

The expected proportion of significant error per year of the hospital is,

s=nps=600000.002=120

03

Determine the fall limit

The limit of the expected proportion significant error per year fall is, ps2ps1psn.

So,

ps2ps1psn=0.00220.00210.00260000=0.00220.00210.00260000,0.002+20.00210.00260000=0.0020.000364,0.002+0.000364=0.00164,0.00236

Thus, the required limit is 0.00164,0.002360.00164,0.00236.

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 91影视!

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

Question:Quality control. Refer to Exercise 5.68. The mean diameter of the bearings produced by the machine is supposed to be .5 inch. The company decides to use the sample mean from Exercise 5.68 to decide whether the process is in control (i.e., whether it is producing bearings with a mean diameter of .5 inch). The machine will be considered out of control if the mean of the sample of n = 25 diameters is less than .4994 inch or larger than .5006 inch. If the true mean diameter of the bearings produced by the machine is .501 inch, what is the approximate probability that the test will imply that the process is out of control?

Fecal pollution at Huntington Beach. California mandates fecal indicator bacteria monitoring at all public beaches. When the concentration of fecal bacteria in the water exceeds a certain limit (400 colony-forming units of fecal coliform per 100 millilitres), local health officials must post a sign (called surf zone posting) warning beachgoers of potential health risks. For fecal bacteria, the state uses a single-sample standard; if the fecal limit is exceeded in a single sample of water, surf zone posting is mandatory. This single-sample standard policy has led to a recent rash of beach closures in California. A study of the surf water quality at Huntington Beach in California was published in Environmental Science & Technology (September 2004). The researchers found that beach closings were occurring despite low pollution levels in some instances, while in others, signs were not posted when the fecal limit was exceeded. They attributed these "surf zone posting errors" to the variable nature of water quality in the surf zone (for example, fecal bacteria concentration tends to be higher during ebb tide and at night) and the inherent time delay between when a water sample is collected and when a sign is posted or removed. To prevent posting errors, the researchers recommend using an averaging method rather than a single sample to determine unsafe water quality. (For example, one simple averaging method is to take a random sample of multiple water specimens and compare the average fecal bacteria level of the sample with the limit of 400 CFU/100 mL to determine whether the water is safe.) Discuss the pros and cons of using the single sample standard versus the averaging method. Part of your discussion should address the probability of posting a sign when the water is safe and the probability of posting a sign when the water is unsafe. (Assume that the fecal bacteria concentrations of water specimens at Huntington Beach follow an approximately normal distribution.

Surface roughness of pipe. Refer to the Anti-CorrosionMethods and Materials(Vol. 50, 2003) study of the surface roughness of oil field pipes, Exercise 2.46 (p. 96). Recall that a scanning probe instrument was used to measure thesurface roughness x(in micrometers) of 20 sampled sectionsof coated interior pipe. Consider the sample mean,X.

  1. Assume that the surface roughness distribution has a mean of = 1.8 micrometers and a standard deviation of = .5 micrometer. Use this information to find theprobability thatexceeds 1.85 micrometers.
  2. The sample data are reproduced in the following table.Compute.
  3. Based on the result, part b, comment on the validity ofthe assumptions made in part a.

1.72

2.50

2.16

2.13

1.06

2.24

2.31

2.03

1.09

1.40

2.57

2.64

1.26

2.05

1.19

2.13

1.27

1.51

2.41

1.95

Cable TV subscriptions and 鈥渃ord cutters.鈥 According to a recent Pew Research Center Survey (December 2015), 15% of U.S. adults admitted they are 鈥渃ord cutters,鈥 i.e., they canceled the cable/satellite TV service they once subscribed to. (See Exercise 2.4, p. 72) In a random sample of 500 U.S. adults, let pn represent the proportion who are 鈥渃ord cutters.鈥

a. Find the mean of the sampling distribution of p^.

b. Find the standard deviation of the sampling distribution of p^.

c. What does the Central Limit Theorem say about the shape of the sampling distribution of p^?

d. Compute the probability that p^is less than .12.

e. Compute the probability that p^is greater than .10.

Downloading 鈥渁pps鈥 to your cell phone. Refer toExercise 4.173 (p. 282) and the August 2011 survey by thePew Internet & American Life Project. The study foundthat 40% of adult cell phone owners have downloadedan application (鈥渁pp鈥) to their cell phone. Assume thispercentage applies to the population of all adult cell phoneowners.

  1. In a random sample of 50 adult cell phone owners, howlikely is it to find that more than 60% have downloadedan 鈥渁pp鈥 to their cell phone?
  2. Refer to part a. Suppose you observe a sample proportionof .62. What inference can you make about the trueproportion of adult cell phone owners who have downloadedan 鈥渁pp鈥?
  3. Suppose the sample of 50 cell phone owners is obtainedat a convention for the International Association forthe Wireless Telecommunications Industry. How willyour answer to part b change, if at all?
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.