/*! 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 48 "Doctors Praise Device That Aids... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

"Doctors Praise Device That Aids Ailing Hearts" (Associated Press, November 9,2004 ) is the headline of an article that describes the results of a study of the effectiveness of a fabric device that acts like a support stocking for a weak or damaged heart. In the study, 107 people who consented to treatment were assigned at random to either a standard treatment consisting of drugs or the experimental treatment that consisted of drugs plus surgery to install the stocking. After two years, \(38 \%\) of the 57 patients receiving the stocking had improved and \(27 \%\) of the patients receiving the standard treatment had improved. Do these data provide convincing evidence that the proportion of patients who improve is higher for the experimental treatment than for the standard treatment? Test the relevant hypotheses using a significance level of \(.05 .\)

Short Answer

Expert verified
Based on the comparison of the calculated test statistic with the critical value, if the test statistic is greater than the critical value, we reject the null hypothesis. This suggests that there is a significant difference in the proportion of patients who improve with the experimental treatment compared to the standard treatment. If the test statistic is not greater than the critical value, we do not reject the null hypothesis, suggesting there is not a significant difference in improvement between the two treatments. The exact answer depends on the calculations.

Step by step solution

01

Identify sample sizes and sample proportions

First, identify the sample sizes and sample proportions for each group in the study. We have \(n_1 = 57\) (the number of patients who received the experimental treatment) and \(n_2 = 50\) (the number of patients who received the standard treatment). We are given that \(38\%\) of \(n_1\) and \(27\%\) of \(n_2\) had improved, so we can calculate our sample proportions: \(p_1 = 0.38 \times n_1\) and \(p_2 = 0.27 \times n_2\).
02

Formulate the hypotheses

This is a test of two populations proportions, so the null hypothesis (\(H_0\)) is that the populations proportions are equal, \(p_1 = p_2\), and the alternative hypothesis (\(H_a\)) is that the proportion of patients who improve is higher for the experimental treatment, \(p_1 > p_2\).
03

Calculate the pooled proportion

The pooled proportion (\(p\)) can be calculated as the total number of successes divided by the total sample size. It's calculated as follows: \(p = (p_1 \times n_1 + p_2 \times n_2) / (n_1 + n_2)\).
04

Compute the test statistic

The test statistic (Z) is calculated as follows: \(Z = (p_1 - p_2) / \sqrt{p(1 - p)(1/n_1 + 1/n_2)}\). Calculate this value using the previously calculated proportions and sample sizes.
05

Make the decision

Compare the computed test statistic (Z) with the critical value at .05 significance level (z_{0.05}) using a Z-table. If Z > z_{0.05}, reject the null hypothesis (\(H_0\)). If not, do not reject the null hypothesis (\(H_0\)).

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.

Population Proportion Comparison
When comparing population proportions, such as the effectiveness of two medical treatments, statisticians use hypothesis tests to evaluate if there is a significant difference between two groups. In our exercise scenario, the population proportion comparison involves assessing if the experimental heart treatment (the fabric device plus drugs) is more effective than the standard treatment of drugs alone. The proportions of patients who showed improvement within each treatment group—38% in the experimental and 27% in the standard—are observed sample proportions.

To compare these, we use these sample proportions to infer if these differences reflect a real difference in the population or are merely due to sampling variability. It's essential to establish that such a comparison is valid only when the sample sizes are sufficient and the samples are randomly selected, as they appear to be in this given study.
Null and Alternative Hypotheses
In hypothesis testing, the null hypothesis (\(H_0\)) is a statement of no effect or no difference, and it serves as the baseline for comparison. For our medical study, the null hypothesis claims that there is no difference in improvement rates between patients receiving the experimental treatment and those receiving the standard treatment, symbolized as \(p_1 = p_2\).

Contrastingly, the alternative hypothesis (\(H_a\) or \(H_1\)) posits that there is an effect or a difference. In this case, the alternative hypothesis asserts that the proportion of patients improving through the experimental treatment is greater than that for the standard treatment, expressed as \(p_1 > p_2\). The formulation of these hypotheses is critical as they guide the direction of the statistical test and how the results are interpreted.
P-Value Significance Level
The p-value in a hypothesis test quantifies the probability of observing the sample results, or something more extreme, if the null hypothesis is true. It's a tool to measure the strength of the evidence against the null hypothesis. The significance level, commonly denoted as \(\alpha\), is the threshold for determining whether to reject the null hypothesis. A standard significance level used in research is 0.05.

This means that if the calculated p-value is less than 0.05, the results are statistically significant, and we have sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis. This threshold reflects a 5% risk of concluding that a difference exists when there is no actual difference - a Type I error. Decision rules in hypothesis testing are established based on this significance level.
Z-Test for Proportions
A Z-test for proportions is a statistical method used to determine if there is a significant difference between the proportions of two groups. The test statistic for a Z-test is calculated using the formula \(Z = (p_1 - p_2) / \sqrt{p(1 - p)(1/n_1 + 1/n_2)}\), where \(p_1\) and \(p_2\) are the sample proportions for each group, \(n_1\) and \(n_2\) are the sample sizes, and \(p\) is the pooled proportion of both samples combined.

The resulting Z value is then compared to a critical value from the standard normal distribution corresponding to the chosen significance level. If the calculated Z is greater than the critical Z (denoted as \(z_{0.05}\) for a 0.05 significance level), we reject the null hypothesis indicating that there is a statistically significant difference between the group proportions. This calculation is pivotal in determining the outcome of our hypothesis test and ultimately informs the conclusions that can be drawn about the treatment effects in the study.

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

Women diagnosed with breast cancer whose tumors have not spread may be faced with a decision between two surgical treatments - mastectomy (removal of the breast) or lumpectomy (only the tumor is removed). In a long-term study of the effectiveness of these two treatments, 701 women with breast cancer were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups. One group received mastectomies and the other group received lumpectomies and radiation. Both groups were followed for 20 years after surgery. It was reported that there was no statistically significant difference in the proportion surviving for 20 years for the two treatments (Associated Press, October 17,2002 ). What hypotheses do you think the researchers tested in order to reach the given conclusion? Did the researchers reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis?

The paper "Ready or Not? Criteria for Marriage Readiness among Emerging Adults" (Journal of \(\underline{\text { Ado- }}\) lescent Research [2009]: 349-375) surveyed emerging adults (defined as age 18 to 25 ) from five different colleges in the United States. Several questions on the survey were used to construct a scale designed to measure endorsement of cohabitation. The paper states that "on average, emerging adult men \((\mathrm{M}=3.75, \mathrm{SD}=1.21)\) reported higher levels of cohabitation endorsement than emerging adult women \((\mathrm{M}=3.39, \mathrm{SD}=1.17) . "\) The sample sizes were 481 for women and 307 for men. a. Carry out a hypothesis test to determine if the reported difference in sample means provides convincing evidence that the mean cohabitation endorsement for emerging adult women is significantly less than the mean for emerging adult men for students at these five colleges. b. What additional information would you want in order to determine whether it is reasonable to generalize the conclusion of the hypothesis test from Part (a) to all college students?

After the 2010 earthquake in Haiti, many charitable organizations conducted fundraising campaigns to raise money for emergency relief. Some of these campaigns allowed people to donate by sending a text message using a cell phone to have the donated amount added to their cell-phone bill. The report "Early Signals on Mobile Philanthropy: Is Haiti the Tipping Point?" (Edge Research, 2010 ) describes the results of a national survey of 1526 people that investigated the ways in which people made donations to the Haiti relief effort. The report states that \(17 \%\) of Gen \(Y\) respondents (those born between 1980 and 1988 ) and \(14 \%\) of Gen \(X\) respondents (those born between 1968 and 1979 ) said that they had made a donation to the Haiti relief effort via text message. The percentage making a donation via text message was much lower for older respondents. The report did not say how many respondents were in the Gen \(\mathrm{Y}\) and Gen \(\mathrm{X}\) samples, but for purposes of this exercise, suppose that both sample sizes were 400 and that it is reasonable to regard the samples as representative of the Gen \(\mathrm{Y}\) and Gen \(\mathrm{X}\) populations. a. Is there convincing evidence that the proportion of those in Gen Y who donated to Haiti relief via text message is greater than the proportion for Gen X? Use \(\alpha=.01\). b. Estimate the difference between the proportion of Gen \(\mathrm{Y}\) and the proportion of Gen \(\mathrm{X}\) that made a donation via text message using a \(99 \%\) confidence interval. Provide an interpretation of both the interval and the associated confidence level.

The press release referenced in the previous exercise also included data from independent surveys of teenage drivers and parents of teenage drivers. In response to a question asking if they approved of laws banning the use of cell phones and texting while driving, \(74 \%\) of the teens surveyed and \(95 \%\) of the parents surveyed said they approved. The sample sizes were not given in the press release, but for purposes of this exercise, suppose that 600 teens and 400 parents of teens responded to the surveys and that it is reasonable to regard these samples as representative of the two populations. Do the data provide convincing evidence that the proportion of teens that approve of cell- phone and texting bans while driving is less than the proportion of parents of teens who approve? Test the relevant hypotheses using a significance level of .05

Consider two populations for which \(\mu_{1}=30\), \(\sigma_{1}=2, \mu_{2}=25,\) and \(\sigma_{2}=3 .\) Suppose that two independent random samples of sizes \(n_{1}=40\) and \(n_{2}=50\) are selected. Describe the approximate sampling distribution of \(\bar{x}_{1}-\bar{x}_{2}\) (center, spread, and shape).

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.