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

"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 Vaia!

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

"Mountain Biking May Reduce Fertility in Men, Study Says" was the headline of an article appearing in the San Luis Obispo Tribune (December 3,2002 ). This conclusion was based on an Austrian study that compared sperm counts of avid mountain bikers (those who ride at least 12 hours per week) and nonbikers. Ninety percent of the avid mountain bikers studied had low sperm counts, as compared to \(26 \%\) of the nonbikers. Suppose that these percentages were based on independent samples of 100 avid mountain bikers and 100 non-bikers and that it is reasonable to view these samples as representative of Austrian avid mountain bikers and nonbikers. a. Do these data provide convincing evidence that the proportion of Austrian avid mountain bikers with low sperm count is higher than the proportion of Austrian nonbikers? b. Based on the outcome of the test in Part (a), is it reasonable to conclude that mountain biking 12 hours per week or more causes low sperm count? Explain.

Can moving their hands help children learn math? This question was investigated in the paper "Gesturing Gives Children New Ideas about Math" (Psychological Science [2009]: 267-272). Eighty-five children in the third and fourth grades who did not answer any questions correctly on a test with six problems of the form \(3+2+8=-8\) were participants in an experiment. The children were randomly assigned to either a no-gesture group or a gesture group. All the children were given a lesson on how to solve problems of this form using the strategy of trying to make both sides of the equation equal. Children in the gesture group were also taught to point to the first two numbers on the left side of the equation with the index and middle finger of one hand and then to point at the blank on the right side of the equation. This gesture was supposed to emphasize that grouping is involved in solving the problem. The children then practiced additional problems of this type. All children were then given a test with six problems to solve, and the number of correct answers was recorded for each child. Summary statistics read from a graph in the paper are given below. $$ \begin{array}{l|ccc} & n & \bar{x} & s \\ \hline \text { No gesture } & 42 & 1.3 & 0.3 \\ \text { Gesture } & 43 & 2.2 & 0.4 \\ \hline \end{array} $$ Is there evidence to support the theory that learning the gesturing approach to solving problems of this type results in a higher mean number of correct responses? Test the relevant hypotheses using \(\alpha=.01\).

In December 2001 , the Department of Veterans Affairs announced that it would begin paying benefits to soldiers suffering from Lou Gehrig's disease who had served in the Gulf War (The New york Times, December 11,2001 ). This decision was based on an analysis in which the Lou Gehrig's disease incidence rate (the proportion developing the disease) for the approximately 700,000 soldiers sent to the Gulf between August 1990 and July 1991 was compared to the incidence rate for the approximately 1.8 million other soldiers who were not in the Gulf during this time period. Based on these data, explain why it is not appropriate to perform a formal inference procedure (such as the two-sample \(z\) test) and yet it is still reasonable to conclude that the incidence rate is higher for Gulf War veterans than for those who did not serve in the Gulf War.

A hotel chain is interested in evaluating reservation processes. Guests can reserve a room by using either a telephone system or an online system that is accessed through the hotel's web site. Independent random samples of 80 guests who reserved a room by phone and 60 guests who reserved a room online were selected. Of those who reserved by phone, 57 reported that they were satisfied with the reservation process. Of those who reserved online, 50 reported that they were satisfied. Based on these data, is it reasonable to conclude that the proportion who are satisfied is higher for those who reserve a room online? Test the appropriate hypotheses using \(\alpha=.05\)

The article referenced in the previous exercise also reported that \(24 \%\) of the males and \(16 \%\) of the females in the 2006 sample reported owning an \(\mathrm{MP} 3\) player. Suppose that there were the same number of males and females in the sample of \(1112 .\) Do these data provide convincing evidence that the proportion of females that owned an MP3 player in 2006 is smaller than the corresponding proportion of males? Carry out a test using a significance level of .01 .

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