/*! 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 14 Avobenzone is one of the active ... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

Avobenzone is one of the active ingredients in several commercially available sunscreens. It can be absorbed into the bloodstream when sunscreen is applied to the skin. The Food and Drug Administration has expressed concern about the safety of absorbing too much avobenzone. Amounts less than or equal to \(0.5 \mathrm{ng} / \mathrm{mL}\) (nanograms absorbed per milliliter applied) are considered acceptable. Researchers recruited 12 healthy volunteers to investigate avobenzone absorption for two different commercially available sunscreens: a spray and a cream. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of the two sunscreens, with 6 subjects for each. Subjects had 2 milligrams of sunscreen per \(1 \mathrm{~cm}^{2}\) applied to \(75 \%\) of their body surface area (area outside of normal swimwear). The amount of avobenzone absorbed into the bloodstream after 6 hours was then measured for each subject. Four of the six subjects receiving the spray had avobenzone levels exceeding \(0.5 \mathrm{ng} / \mathrm{mL}\), and one of the six subjects receiving the cream had levels exceeding \(0.5 \mathrm{ng} / \mathrm{mL} .16\) The \(z\) test for "no difference" in the two proportions exceeding \(0.5 \mathrm{ng} / \mathrm{mL}\) against "the two proportions differ" has a. \(z=1.76, P<0.05\). b. \(z=1.84, P<0.055\). c. \(z=1.76,0.05

Short Answer

Expert verified
The answer is (c) \( z=1.76,0.05<P<0.10 \).

Step by step solution

01

Understanding the Problem

We have two groups of data from two types of sunscreen: a spray and a cream. We want to compare the proportions of subjects in each group with avobenzone levels exceeding 0.5 ng/mL.
02

Identify the Proportions

For the spray, 4 out of 6 subjects exceeded 0.5 ng/mL, so the proportion is \( \frac{4}{6} \). For the cream, 1 out of 6 subjects exceeded 0.5 ng/mL, so the proportion is \( \frac{1}{6} \).
03

Calculate Pooled Proportion

The pooled proportion \( p \) is calculated from both samples:\[p = \frac{x_1 + x_2}{n_1 + n_2} = \frac{4 + 1}{6 + 6} = \frac{5}{12}\]
04

Compute Standard Error

The standard error (SE) for the difference in proportions is calculated as:\[SE = \sqrt{p(1-p)\left(\frac{1}{n_1} + \frac{1}{n_2}\right)} = \sqrt{\frac{5}{12}\cdot\frac{7}{12}\left(\frac{1}{6} + \frac{1}{6}\right)}\]
05

Calculate the Z Score

The Z-score is calculated with the formula:\[z = \frac{\hat{p}_1 - \hat{p}_2}{SE} = \frac{\frac{4}{6} - \frac{1}{6}}{SE}\] Substitute \( SE \) from the previous step to find \( z \approx 1.76 \).
06

Interpret the Results

The question provides options for interpretation of \( z \) and \( p \)-values. The calculated \( z = 1.76 \), and since \( z = 1.76 \) with a \( p \)-value between 0.05 and 0.10 matches option (c), choose this option.

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.

Sunscreen Absorption Study
Sunscreen absorption studies aim to understand how ingredients like avobenzone are absorbed through the skin and enter the bloodstream. The concern around avobenzone absorption is due to potential health implications when levels surpass acceptable thresholds. In this study, researchers were interested in the absorption levels of avobenzone from two different sunscreens: a spray and a cream. Twelve healthy volunteers participated, with half using the spray and the other half using the cream. The principal goal was to track whether the avobenzone level in the bloodstream exceeded 0.5 nanograms per milliliter. To ensure that the study was fair and unbiased, subjects were randomly assigned to either the spray or the cream sunscreen group. This random assignment helps to reduce potential biases and balances out other variables that could affect absorption rates. Each subject applied a significant amount of sunscreen, specifically two milligrams per square centimeter, over most of their body—75% to be exact—outside the area that typical swimwear would cover. This thorough application is aimed at closely mimicking real-world scenarios where sunscreen is applied generously over large skin areas.
Proportions Comparison
When comparing the effects of two different sunscreens, proportions of subjects with high levels of avobenzone absorption in their bloodstream were calculated. This means looking at how many subjects in each group had absorption levels that climbed over the 0.5 ng/mL mark. In the study, you have two groups: one group using the spray sunscreen, and the other using the cream. The proportions of those exceeding 0.5 ng/mL were:
  • Spray sunscreen: 4 out of 6 subjects
  • Cream sunscreen: 1 out of 6 subjects
These proportions translate to about 67% for the spray group and about 17% for the cream group. By examining these proportions, researchers try to determine if there's a significant difference in absorption rates between the two types of sunscreens. The comparison is crucial because it highlights whether one type of sunscreen may lead to higher levels of avobenzone absorption than the other. This information is essential for assessing the safety and effectiveness of these products.
Avobenzone Safety
Avobenzone is a common active ingredient used in sunscreens to provide broad-spectrum UV protection. However, the safety of avobenzone is contingent on how much is absorbed into the bloodstream. The threshold that delineates safe levels from potentially concerning levels is 0.5 ng/mL. When levels rise above this mark, it triggers safety concerns as chronic exposure could pose health risks. The study aims to quantify how different types of sunscreen formulations—spray versus cream—contribute to the levels of avobenzone absorbed. Understanding these differences is crucial, as products that result in higher absorption can pose health risks if they frequently push absorption levels above acceptable limits. By studying avobenzone absorption, researchers, regulatory bodies, and consumers can make better-informed decisions on sunscreen use. If a particular formulation consistently contributes to excessive absorption levels, it may prompt reformulation or indicate a need for restrictions on its use.
Statistical Hypothesis Testing
Statistical hypothesis testing is the backbone of such studies, allowing researchers to determine if the differences in avobenzone absorption between the two sunscreen groups are significant. In this particular case, they are interested in comparing the proportions of people exceeding 0.5 ng/mL of avobenzone in the bloodstream between the two types. The null hypothesis (H0) claims that there is no difference in proportions between the groups using spray and cream sunscreens. In contrast, the alternative hypothesis (H1) posits that a difference does exist. By calculating a z-score (approximately 1.76 in this instance), researchers quantify the difference in standard deviations between the observed and expected results. The calculated p-value reflects the probability of observing this difference under the null hypothesis. If the p-value is small (usually less than 0.05), the null hypothesis can be rejected. However, in this context, the p-value is between 0.05 and 0.10, indicating that the data is suggestive but not definitive. Therefore, while there may be a tendency towards higher absorption in the spray group, the evidence isn't strong enough to conclude a significant difference.

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

Are They Tracking Me? A survey in 2019 asked a random sample of U.S. adults if they believed the government was tracking all or most of their activities online or on their cell phones. Of the 671 adults aged 18-29, 396 said "yes." Of the 977 adults aged 65 or older, 293 said "yes." 17 a. Do these samples satisfy the guidelines for the largesample confidence interval? b. Give a \(95 \%\) confidence interval for the difference between the proportions of adults aged 18-29 and adults aged 65 or older who believed the government was tracking all or most of their activities online or on their cell phones.

I'll Stop Smoking-Soon! (continued). The clinical trial described in Exercise.23,29 assigned subjects at random to receive either Chantix or a placebo. To check that the random assignment produced comparable groups, we can compare the two groups at the start of the study. a. In the treatment group, 439 of the 760 subjects had made at least two serious attempts to quit smoking by any method since starting smoking, and in the placebo group, 303 of the 750 subjects had made at least two attempts. If the random assignment worked well, there should not be a significant difference in the proportions of subjects in the two groups who had made at least two serious attempts to quit smoking by any method since starting smoking. How significant is the observed difference? b. For the subjects in the treatment group, the mean of the number of cigarettes smoked per day in the past month was 20.6, with a standard deviation of \(8.5\), and in the placebo group, the mean was \(20.8\), with a standard deviation of \(8.2\). If the random assignment worked well, there should not be a significant difference in the means of the number of cigarettes smoked per day in the past month for the two groups. How significant is the observed difference?

Stopping Traffic with a Smile! Throughout Europe, more than 8000 pedestrians are killed each year in road accidents, with approximately \(25 \%\) of them dying when using a pedestrian crossing. Alt hough failure to stop for pedestrians at a pedestrian crossing is a serious traffic offense in France, more than half of drivers do not stop when a pedestrian is waiting at a crosswalk. In this experiment, a male research assistant was instructed to stand at a pedestrian crosswalk and stare at the driver's face as a car approached the crosswalk. In 400 trials, the research assistant maintained a neutral expression, and in a second set of 400 trials, the research assistant was instructed to smile. The order of smiling or not smiling was randomized, and several pedestrian crossings were used in a town on the coast in the west of France. The research assistants was dressed in normal attire for his age (jeans, t-shirt, and sneakers). In the 400 trials in which the assistant maintained a neutral expression, the driver stopped in 172 out of the 400 trials, while in the 400 trials in which the assistant smiled at the driver, the driver stopped 226 times. 2 Do a test to assess the evidence that a smile increases the proportion of drivers who stopped. (In the portion of the study using female assistants, a smile significantly increased the proportion of drivers who stopped, with the proportion who stopped being significantly higher than for males in both the neutral and smiling conditions.)

{ Protecting Skiers and Snowboarders. Most alpine }\( skiers and snowboarders do not use helmets. Do helmets reduce the risk of head injuries? A study in Norway compared skiers and snowboarders who suffered head injuries with a control group who were not injured. Of 578 injured subjects, 96 had worn a helmet. Of the 2992 in the control group, 656 wore helmets. 9 Is helmet use less common among skiers and snowboarders who have head injuries? Follow the four-step process as illustrated in Examples 23.4 and \)23.5$ (pages 524 and 525 ). (Note that this is an observational study that compares injured and uninjured subjects. An experiment that assigned subjects to helmet and no- helmet groups would be more convincing.)

Aerosolized Vaccine for Measles. An aerosolized vaccine for measles was developed in Mexico and has been used on more than 4 million children since 1980 . Aerosolized vaccines have the advantages of being able to be administered by people without clinical training and do not cause injectionassociated infections. Despite these advantages, data about efficacy of the aerosolized vaccines against measles compared to subcutaneous injection of the vaccine have been inconsistent. Because of this, a large randomized controlled study was conducted using children in India. The primary outcome was an immune response to measles measured 91 days after the treatments. Among the 785 children receiving the subcutaneous injection, 743 developed an immune response, while among the 775 children receiving the aerosolized vaccine, 662 developed an immune response. 3 a. Compute the proportion of subjects experiencing the primary outcome for both the aerosol and injection groups. b. Can we safely use the large-sample confidence interval for comparing the proportion of children who developed an immune response to measles in the aerosol and injection groups? Explain. c. Give a \(95 \%\) confidence interval for the difference between the proportion of children in the aerosol and injection groups who experienced the primary outcome. d. The study described is an example of a noninferiority clinical trial intended to show that the effect of a new treatment, the aerosolized vaccine, is not worse than that of the standard treatment by more than a specified margin. 4 Specifically, is the percentage of children who developed an immune response for the aerosol treatment more than \(5 \%\) below the percentage for the subcutaneous injected vaccine? The 5percentage-point difference was based on previous studies and the fact that with a bigger difference, the aerosolized vaccine would not provide the levels of protection necessary to achieve herd immunity. Using your answer in part (c), do you feel the investigators demonstrated the noninferiority of the aerosolized vaccine? 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.