/*! 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 103 Multiple choice: Be skeptical of... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

Multiple choice: Be skeptical of medical studies? An analysis of published medical studies about heart attacks (Crossen, \(1994,\) p. 168 ) noted that in the studies having randomization and strong controls for bias, the new therapy provided improved treatment \(9 \%\) of the time. In studies without randomization or other controls for bias, the new therapy provided improved treatment \(58 \%\) of the time. a. This result suggests it is better not to use randomization in medical studies, because it is harder to show that new ideas are beneficial. b. Some newspaper articles that suggest a particular food, drug, or environmental agent is harmful or beneficial should be viewed skeptically, unless we learn more about the statistical design and analysis for the study. c. This result shows the value of case-control studies over randomized studies. d. The randomized studies were poorly conducted, or they would have found the new treatment to be better much more than \(9 \%\) of the time.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Option b is correct: skepticism is warranted without details on study design.

Step by step solution

01

Understand the Context

The medical studies discussed involve new therapies for heart attacks. There are two types of studies compared: ones with randomization and strong controls for bias, and ones without these controls. The outcomes of the new therapy differ significantly between the two study types.
02

Analyze the New Therapy Outcomes

For studies with randomization and controls, the new therapy showed improvement 9% of the time. In contrast, studies without these controls showed the therapy improved outcomes 58% of the time. The significant difference highlights the importance of study design in interpreting results.
03

Interpret the Implications

The discrepancy suggests that studies without randomization and bias control are more likely to report false positives, showing non-existent benefits of a therapy. This is because such studies may be subject to various biases, overestimating the effectiveness of the treatment.
04

Evaluate the Answer Options

- Option a is incorrect because avoiding randomization for better results invalidates scientific rigor. - Option b emphasizes skepticism, aligning with the need for understanding study design, thus likely correct. - Option c incorrectly values case-control over rigorous randomized studies. - Option d wrongly suggests problems with randomized studies instead of recognizing bias issues in non-randomized ones.

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.

Randomization
Randomization is a key component in the design of scientific studies, particularly in medical research. It involves assigning participants to different groups using random methods, such as a lottery or computer-generated random numbers. By doing this, researchers aim to ensure that each group is comparable and that the distribution of participants' characteristics is as balanced as possible. This balance is crucial because it minimizes the chance that observed effects are due to underlying differences between groups rather than the intervention being tested.

When randomization is not used, it opens the door to potential biases and confounding variables that could skew the results, making them unreliable. For example, if all the healthiest patients happen to be assigned to a particular treatment group by choice rather than chance, any positive results could mistakenly be attributed to the treatment rather than the initial health status of the patients.

In the context of heart attack treatments, randomization helps in objectively assessing the effectiveness of new therapies by distributing both known and unknown factors equally across treatment groups.
Bias Control
Bias control is an essential aspect of scientific research, particularly in medical studies. Bias occurs when there are systematic errors in the research that lead to incorrect conclusions. Controlling bias ensures that the results of a study are valid and reliable. There are several approaches to managing bias:
  • Blinding: Keeping patients and sometimes researchers unaware of the group assignments to prevent their perceptions from affecting the outcomes.
  • Randomization: Already highlighted, helps prevent selection bias.
  • Standardized Protocols: Ensuring that each part of the study is conducted in the same way for all participants to reduce experimental bias.


In the heart attack treatment studies, effective bias control would involve using these methods to ensure the results are accurately reflecting the efficacy of the new therapy rather than being influenced by external factors or investigator expectations. Without proper bias control, studies might incorrectly indicate that a treatment is beneficial when it is not, as seen in the non-randomized studies from the original analysis.
Statistical Design
Statistical design refers to the planning of experiments or studies to ensure that they address the research question effectively and efficiently, while accounting for variability and other challenges. Good statistical design involves appropriate use of randomization and bias control, as these help ensure that the study can make reliable inferences about a treatment's effectiveness.

Additionally, considerations like the sample size, study duration, and statistical power are also critical. A well-designed study will have adequate sample size to ensure the results are statistically significant, meaning that any observed effects are unlikely due to chance.

For heart attack treatments, a robust statistical design will carefully plan every aspect from patient selection to data analysis, ensuring the findings accurately reflect the true effectiveness of the treatment being investigated.
Heart Attack Treatments
Heart attack treatments have evolved significantly, thanks to continuous research and advancements in medical science. The goal of studying new heart attack treatments is to find more effective methods to help patients recover and prevent future incidents.

Common treatments include medication to dissolve clots, procedures to open blocked arteries, and lifestyle changes to mitigate risk factors. In medical research, studies aim to find better or more efficient treatments techniques that can improve patient outcomes.

When assessing new heart attack treatments, well-conducted studies use randomization and control for bias to provide trustworthy evidence of efficacy. Without these methods, results can be misleading, as demonstrated in studies that lacked randomization, which showed an inflated benefit that might not actually exist. Reliable studies are crucial for developing effective treatments to improve patient's quality of life and survival rates.

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

Student loan debt \(\quad\) A researcher wants to compare student loan debt for students who attend four-year public universities with those who attend four- year private universities. She plans to take a random sample of 100 recent graduates of public universities and 100 recent graduates of private universities. Which type of random sampling is utilized in her study design?

Cell phones If you want to conduct a study with humans to see if cell phone use makes brain cancer more likely, explain why an observational study is more realistic than an experiment.

Age for legal alcohol You want to investigate the opinions students at your school have about whether the age for legal drinking of alcohol should be 18 . a. Write a question to ask about this in a sample survey in such a way that results would be biased. Explain why it would be biased. b. Now write an alternative question that should result in unbiased responses.

Munchie capture-recapture Your class can use the capture-recapture method described in the previous exercise to estimate the number of goldfish in a bag of Cheddar Goldfish. Pour the Cheddar Goldfish into a paper bag, which represents the pond. Sample 10 of them. For this initial sample, use Pretzel Goldfish to replace them, to represent the tagged fish. Then select a second sample and derive an estimate for \(N,\) the number of Cheddar Goldfish in the original bag. See how close your estimate comes to the actual number of fish in the bag. (Your teacher will count the population of Cheddar Goldfish in the bag before beginning the sampling.) If the estimate is not close, what could be responsible, and what would this reflect as difficulties in a real-life application such as sampling a wildlife population?

Mean family size You'd like to estimate the mean size of families in your community. Explain why you'll tend to get a smaller sample mean if you sample \(n\) families than if you sample \(n\) individuals (asking them to report their family size). (Hint: When you sample individuals, explain why you are more likely to sample a large family than a small family. To think of this, it may help to consider the case \(n=1\) with a population of two families, one with 10 people and one with only 2 people.)

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.