Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Does Aspirin Prevent Heart Disease? In a trial designed to test the effectiveness of aspirin in preventing heart disease, 11,037 male physicians were treated with aspirin and 11,034 male physicians were given placebos. Among the subjects in the aspirin treatment group, 139 experienced myocardial infarctions (heart attacks). Among the subjects given placebos, 239 experienced myocardial infarctions (based on data from “Final Report on the Aspirin Component of the Ongoing Physicians’ Health Study,” New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 321: 129–135). Use a 0.05 significance level to test the claim that aspirin has no effect on myocardial infarctions.

a. Test the claim using a hypothesis test.

b. Test the claim by constructing an appropriate confidence interval.

c. Based on the results, does aspirin appear to be effective?

Short Answer

Expert verified

a. Using the hypothesis test, it is concluded thatthere is sufficient evidence to reject the claim thataspirin has no effect on myocardial infarctions.

b.Thus, the 95% confidence interval is equal to (-0.12, -0.006). As 0 does not lie within the interval, there is sufficient evidence to reject the claim thataspirin has no effect on myocardial infarctions.

c. It can be said that aspirin is effective in reducing the risk of myocardial infarction.

Step by step solution

01

Given information

A sample of 11,037 male physicians was treated with aspirin. Among them, 139 experienced myocardial infarctions. Another sample of 11,034 male physicians was given placebos. Among them, 239 experienced myocardial infarctions.

02

Describe the hypotheses

It is claimed that aspirin has no effect on myocardial infarctions.

Null hypothesis: Theproportion of physicians who experienced myocardial infarctions after taking aspirin is equal to the proportion of physicians who experienced myocardial infarctions after taking the placebo.

\({H_0}:{p_1} = {p_2}\)

Alternative hypothesis: Theproportion of physicians who experienced myocardial infarctions after taking aspirin is not equal to the proportion of physicians who experienced myocardial infarctions after taking the placebo.

\({H_1}:{p_1} \ne {p_2}\)

The test is two-tailed.

03

Important values

Let \({\hat p_1}\) denote the sampleproportionof physicians who experienced myocardial infarctions after taking aspirin.

\(\begin{array}{c}{{\hat p}_1} = \frac{{139}}{{11037}}\\ = 0.0126\end{array}\)

Let \({\hat p_2}\) denote the sampleproportionof physicians who experienced myocardial infarctions after taking the placebo.

\(\begin{array}{c}{{\hat p}_2} = \frac{{239}}{{11034}}\\ = 0.0217\end{array}\)

The sample size of physicians who weretreated with aspirin\(\left( {{n_1}} \right)\)is equal to 11037.

The sample size of physicians who weretreated with a placebo\(\left( {{n_2}} \right)\)is equal to 11034.

The value of the pooled sample proportion is computed as follows.

\(\begin{array}{c}\bar p = \frac{{\left( {{x_1} + {x_2}} \right)}}{{\left( {{n_1} + {n_2}} \right)}}\,\\ = \frac{{\left( {139 + 239} \right)}}{{\left( {11037 + 11034} \right)}}\\ = 0.0171\end{array}\)

\(\begin{array}{c}\bar q = 1 - \bar p\\ = 1 - 0.0171\\ = 0.9829\end{array}\).

04

Find the test statistic

The test statistic is computed as follows.

\(\begin{array}{c}z = \frac{{\left( {{{\hat p}_1} - {{\hat p}_2}} \right) - \left( {{p_1} - {p_2}} \right)}}{{\sqrt {\left( {\frac{{\bar p\bar q}}{{{n_1}}} + \frac{{\bar p\bar q}}{{{n_2}}}} \right)} }}\\ = \frac{{\left( {0.0126 - 0.0217} \right) - 0}}{{\sqrt {\left( {\frac{{0.0171 \times 0.9829}}{{11037}} + \frac{{0.0171 \times 0.9829}}{{11034}}} \right)} }}\\ = - 5.1907\end{array}\).

The value of the test statistic is -5.1907.

Referring to the standard normal distribution table, the critical value of z corresponding to\(\alpha = 0.05\)for a two-tailed test is equal to 1.96.

Referring to the standard normal distribution table, the corresponding p-value for z equal to -5.1907 is equal to 0.000.

As the p-value is less than 0.05, the null hypothesis is rejected.

05

Conclusion of the test

a.

There is sufficient evidence to reject the claim thataspirin has no effect on myocardial infarctions.

06

Find the confidence interval

b.

The general formula for the confidence interval of the difference of proportions is written below.

\({\rm{Confidence}}\,\,{\rm{Interval}} = \left( {\left( {{{\hat p}_1} - {{\hat p}_2}} \right) - E\,\,,\,\,\left( {{{\hat p}_1} - {{\hat p}_2}} \right) + E} \right)\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,...\left( 1 \right)\)\(\)

Here, E is the margin of error and has the following formula:

\(E = {z_{\frac{\alpha }{2}}} \times \sqrt {\left( {\frac{{{{\hat p}_1} \times {{\hat q}_1}}}{{{n_1}}} + \frac{{{{\hat p}_2} \times {{\hat q}_2}}}{{{n_2}}}} \right)} \).

For computing the confidence interval, first, find the critical value\({z_{\frac{\alpha }{2}}}\).

Here,\(\alpha = 0.05\).

Hence,

\(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\alpha }{2} = \frac{{0.05}}{2}\\ = 0.025\end{array}\).

The value of\({z_{\frac{\alpha }{2}}}\)from the standard normal table is equal to 1.96.

Now, the margin of error (E) is equal to

\(\begin{array}{c}E = {z_{\frac{\alpha }{2}}} \times \sqrt {\left( {\frac{{{{\hat p}_1} \times {{\hat q}_1}}}{{{n_1}}} + \frac{{{{\hat p}_2} \times {{\hat q}_2}}}{{{n_2}}}} \right)} \\ = 1.96 \times \sqrt {\left( {\frac{{0.0126 \times 0.9874}}{{11037}} + \frac{{0.0217 \times 0.9783}}{{11034}}} \right)} \\ = 0.00342\end{array}\).

Substitute the value of E in equation (1), as follows.

\(\begin{array}{c}{\rm{Confidence}}\,\,{\rm{Interval}} = \left( {\left( {{{\hat p}_1} - {{\hat p}_2}} \right) - E\,\,,\,\,\left( {{{\hat p}_1} - {{\hat p}_2}} \right) + E} \right)\\ = \left( {\left( {0.0126 - 0.0217} \right) - 0.00342\,\,,\,\,\left( {0.0126 - 0.0217} \right) + 0.00342} \right)\\ = \left( { - 0.012\,,\, - 0.006} \right)\end{array}\).

Thus, the 95% confidence interval is equal to (-0.12, -0.006).

07

Conclusion based on the confidence interval

The interval does not contain the value of 0 and contains all negative values.

This implies that the values of the two proportions cannot be equal.

There is sufficient evidence to reject the claim thataspirin has no effect on myocardial infarctions.

08

Effectiveness of aspirin

c.

As the confidence interval consists of negative values, the proportion of physicians who experienced myocardial infarctions after taking aspirin is less as compared to the physicians who took the placebo.

Therefore, it can be concluded that aspirin is effective in reducing the case of myocardial infarction.

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 Vaia!

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

In Exercises 5–20, assume that the two samples are independent simple random samples selected from normally distributed populations, and do not assume that the population standard deviations are equal. (Note: Answers in Appendix D include technology answers based on Formula 9-1 along with “Table” answers based on Table A-3 with df equal to the smaller of\({n_1} - 1\)and\({n_2} - 1\).)Blanking Out on Tests Many students have had the unpleasant experience of panicking on a test because the first question was exceptionally difficult. The arrangement of test items was studied for its effect on anxiety. The following scores are measures of “debilitating test anxiety,” which most of us call panic or blanking out (based on data from “Item Arrangement, Cognitive Entry Characteristics, Sex and Test Anxiety as Predictors of Achievement in Examination Performance,” by Klimko, Journal of Experimental Education, Vol. 52, No. 4.) Is there sufficient evidence to support the claim that the two populations of scores have different means? Is there sufficient evidence to support the claim that the arrangement of the test items has an effect on the score? Is the conclusion affected by whether the significance level is 0.05 or 0.01?

Questions Arranged from Easy to Difficult

24.64

39.29

16.32

32.83

28.02

33.31

20.60

21.13

26.69

28.9

26.43

24.23

7.10

32.86

21.06

28.89

28.71

31.73

30.02

21.96

25.49

38.81

27.85

30.29

30.72

Questions Arranged from Difficult to Easy

33.62

34.02

26.63

30.26

35.91

26.68

29.49

35.32

27.24

32.34

29.34

33.53

27.62

42.91

30.20

32.54

Degrees of Freedom

For Example 1 on page 431, we used df smaller of n1-1and n2-1, we got , and the corresponding critical values aret=±2.201. If we calculate df using Formula 9-1, we getdf=19.063, and the corresponding critical values are t=±2.201. How is using the critical values of more “conservative” than using the critical values of ±2.093.

Repeat Exercise 12 “IQ and Lead” by assuming that the two population standard deviations are equal, so \({\sigma _1} = {\sigma _2}\). Use the appropriate method from Part 2 of this section. Does pooling the standard deviations yield results showing greater significance?

Critical Thinking: Did the NFL Rule Change Have the Desired Effect? Among 460 overtime National Football League (NFL) games between 1974 and 2011, 252 of the teams that won the overtime coin toss went on to win the game. During those years, a team could win the coin toss and march down the field to win the game with a field goal, and the other team would never get possession of the ball. That just didn’t seem fair. Starting in 2012, the overtime rules were changed. In the first three years with the new overtime rules, 47 games were decided in overtime and the team that won the coin toss won 24 of those games. Analyzing the Results

First explore the two proportions of overtime wins. Does there appear to be a difference? If so, how?

Testing Claims About Proportions. In Exercises 7–22, test the given claim. Identify the null hypothesis, alternative hypothesis, test statistic, P-value or critical value(s), then state the conclusion about the null hypothesis, as well as the final conclusion that addresses the original claim.

Is Echinacea Effective for Colds? Rhinoviruses typically cause common colds. In a test of the effectiveness of Echinacea, 40 of the 45 subjects treated with Echinacea developed rhinovirus infections. In a placebo group, 88 of the 103 subjects developed rhinovirus infections (based on data from “An Evaluation of Echinacea Angustifolia in Experimental Rhinovirus Infections,” by Turner et al., New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 353, No. 4). We want to use a 0.05 significance level to test the claim that Echinacea has an effect on rhinovirus infections.

a. Test the claim using a hypothesis test.

b. Test the claim by constructing an appropriate confidence interval.

c. Based on the results, does Echinacea appear to have any effect on the infection rate?

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.

Sign-up for free