DNP-MODULE 6
Mechy19
MODULE6BIOSTATISTICS.docx
MODULE 6 BIOSTATISTIC ASSIGNMENT 1 AND 2
ASSIGNMENT 1
A randomized trial is designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a newly developed pain reliever designed to reduce pain in patients following joint replacement surgery. The trial compares the new pain reliever to the pain reliever currently in use (called the standard of care). A total of 100 patients undergoing joint replacement surgery agreed to participate in the trial. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either the new pain reliever or the standard pain reliever following surgery and were blind to the treatment assignment. Before receiving the assigned treatment, patients were asked to rate their pain on a scale of 0-10 with higher scores indicative of more pain. Each patient was then given the assigned treatment and after 30 minutes was again asked to rate their pain on the same scale. The primary outcome was a reduction in pain of 3 or more scale points (defined by clinicians as a clinically meaningful reduction). The following data were observed in the trial.
|
Treatment Group |
n |
Number with Reduction of 3+ Points |
Proportion with Reduction of 3+ Points |
|
New Pain Reliever |
50 |
23 |
0.46 |
|
Standard Pain Reliever |
50 |
11 |
0.22 |
Hint 1: Tests with Two Independent Samples, Dichotomous Outcome.
Hint 2: Remember the Confidence Interval z score table.
REQUIREMENTS
1 Page listing the hypotheses, test statistic used, standard z score, and your conclusion based on your calculations.
It should include at least 2 academic sources, formatted and cited in APA within the past 5 years
CAN’T BE MORE THAN 10% PLAGIARISM OR AI TEXT PLEASE
WILL BE SUBMITTED VIA TURNIN IN
EACH ASSIGNMENT MUST BE DONE INDEPENDENTLY
RUBRIC BELOW ASSIGNMENT 1
- Official Assignment Rubric
- Official Assignment Rubric
|
Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Professionalism Concept Application |
20 to >18.0 pts Excellent The student meets 90% to 100% of the required content criteria by mastering both rudimentary and complex elements and, in addition, applying high-level facts, theories, definitions, and other contextual aspects. Lastly, all the delivered information is compliant with the assignment instructions. 18 to >16.0 pts Good The student meets 80% to 89% of the required content criteria by recognizing the fundamental, rudimentary, and complex elements and applying proficient facts, theories, definitions, and other contextual aspects. Lastly, all the delivered information is compliant with the assignment instructions. 16 to >14.0 pts Fair The student meets 70% to 79% of the required content criteria by recognizing rudimentary and complex elements and demonstrating facts, theories, definitions, and other contextual aspects. All of the delivered information is compliant with the assignment instructions. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor The student meets less than 70% of the required content criteria with a low-level approach of rudimentary and complex elements and a lack of application facts, theories, definitions, and other contextual aspects. However, all the delivered information is compliant with the assignment instructions. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Grammar Written Communication |
20 to >18.0 pts Excellent Excellence in grammar, spelling, and sentence structure. Sentences are not too long and are complete sentences. 18 to >16.0 pts Good Minimal (1 - 3) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors 16 to >14.0 pts Fair Multiple (4 -7) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor Severe (8 - 10) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable Unacceptable (11 or more) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Communication Specific Formatting |
20 to >18.0 pts Excellent The assignment meets 90 % - 100% of the required formatting elements in the assignment description. Additionally, the presented information is complete in all the required components and exceeds expectations. 18 to >16.0 pts Good The assignment meets 80% to 89% of the required formatting elements in the assignment description. Additionally, the presented information meets all the necessary components and formatting requirements. 16 to >14.0 pts Fair The assignment meets 70% to 79% of the required formatting elements in the assignment description. However, the presented information is missing some key details, but overall does not disrupt the required format. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor The assignment meets at most 69% of the required formatting elements in the description. The presented information is missing some key details that disrupt the needed formatting. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Critical and Logical Thinking Thought analysis process |
20 to >18.0 pts Excellent The assignment meets 90% to 100% of rudimentary and complex details, situations, problems, and diagnosis awareness that are accurate and correctly documented. In addition, the analysis offers a clear and concise analysis along with an impeccable and precise, well-thought process. 18 to >16.0 pts Good The assignment meets 80% to 89% of rudimentary and complex details, situations, problems, and diagnosis awareness which are accurate and correctly documented. The analysis is well communicated, and the fundamental thought process presented in the written piece clearly aligns with the assignment expectations. 16 to >14.0 pts Fair The assignment satisfies 70% to 79% of rudimentary and complex details, situations, problems, or diagnosis awareness but may overlook some essential parameters. The analysis and thought process presented in the written piece is evident; however, still developing. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor The assignment meets at most 69% of rudimentary details, situations, problems, or diagnosis awareness, but there was a severe overlook of some essential parameters. In addition, the analysis and thought process presented in the written piece is not evident and not founded on previous discussions or information. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Academic Literacy Quality of Sources and APA Citations |
20 to >18.0 pts Excellent Supporting information is pertinent to the topic, up to date (depending on what is acceptable in the field), from credible and trusted sources, and the number of sources meets the requested amount. Additionally, all sources are recognized or cited properly. 18 to >16.0 pts Good Supporting information is pertinent to the topic, however, 1 source is not a credible and trusted source; they may or may not be the most recent (depending on what is acceptable in the field). Additionally, the number of sources meets the requested amount. The essay offers correct formatting on the setup, and title page, with minimal formatting or punctuation errors within the in-text citations or references. 16 to >14.0 pts Fair Supporting information is pertinent to the topic, however, 2 or more sources are not credible and trusted sources; they may or may not be the most recent (depending on what is acceptable in the field). Additionally, the number of sources meets the requested amount. The essay offers correct formatting, setup, and title page but has significant errors within in-text citations and references. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor The following criteria would apply, supporting information is not pertinent to the topic, none of the sources are from credible or trusted sources, or the number of sources requested was not met. The essay offers severe incorrect APA formatting, setup or missing title page, and/or problematic in-text citations and references. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted. |
20 pts |
Total Points: 100
ASSIGNMENT 2 — MUST BE DONE IN A SEPARATELY WORD DOCUMENT
In a prior example we evaluated data from a survey of university graduates which assessed, among other things, how frequently they exercised. The survey was completed by 470 graduates. In the prior example we used the χ2 goodness-of-fit test to assess whether there was a shift in the distribution of responses to the exercise question following the implementation of a health promotion campaign on campus. We specifically considered one sample (all students) and compared the observed distribution to the distribution of responses the prior year (a historical control). Suppose we now wish to assess whether there is a relationship between exercise on campus and students' living arrangements. As part of the same survey, graduates were asked where they lived their senior year. The response options were dormitory, on-campus apartment, off-campus apartment, and at home (i.e., commuted to and from the university). The data are shown below.
|
|
No Regular Exercise |
Sporadic Exercise |
Regular Exercise |
Total |
|
Dormitory |
32 |
30 |
28 |
90 |
|
On-Campus Apartment |
74 |
64 |
42 |
180 |
|
Off-Campus Apartment |
110 |
25 |
15 |
150 |
|
At Home |
39 |
6 |
5 |
50 |
|
Total |
255 |
125 |
90 |
470 |
Based on the data, is there a relationship between exercise and a student's living arrangement? Do you think where a person lives affect their exercise status? Here we have four independent comparison groups (living arrangement) and a discrete (ordinal) outcome variable with three response options. We specifically want to test whether living arrangements and exercise are independent.
REQUIREMENTS
1 PAGE
It should include at least 2 academic sources, formatted and cited in APA within the past 5 years
CAN’T BE MORE THAN 10% PLAGIARISM OR AI TEXT PLEASE
EACH ASSIGNMENT MUST BE DONE INDEPENDENTLY
WILL BE SUBMITTED VIA TURNIN IN
Rubric FOR ASSIGNMENT 2
- Official Assignment Rubric
- Official Assignment Rubric
|
Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Professionalism Concept Application |
20 to >18.0 pts Excellent The student meets 90% to 100% of the required content criteria by mastering both rudimentary and complex elements and, in addition, applying high-level facts, theories, definitions, and other contextual aspects. Lastly, all the delivered information is compliant with the assignment instructions. 18 to >16.0 pts Good The student meets 80% to 89% of the required content criteria by recognizing the fundamental, rudimentary, and complex elements and applying proficient facts, theories, definitions, and other contextual aspects. Lastly, all the delivered information is compliant with the assignment instructions. 16 to >14.0 pts Fair The student meets 70% to 79% of the required content criteria by recognizing rudimentary and complex elements and demonstrating facts, theories, definitions, and other contextual aspects. All of the delivered information is compliant with the assignment instructions. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor The student meets less than 70% of the required content criteria with a low-level approach of rudimentary and complex elements and a lack of application facts, theories, definitions, and other contextual aspects. However, all the delivered information is compliant with the assignment instructions. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Grammar Written Communication |
20 to >18.0 pts Excellent Excellence in grammar, spelling, and sentence structure. Sentences are not too long and are complete sentences. 18 to >16.0 pts Good Minimal (1 - 3) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors 16 to >14.0 pts Fair Multiple (4 -7) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor Severe (8 - 10) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable Unacceptable (11 or more) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Communication Specific Formatting |
20 to >18.0 pts Excellent The assignment meets 90 % - 100% of the required formatting elements in the assignment description. Additionally, the presented information is complete in all the required components and exceeds expectations. 18 to >16.0 pts Good The assignment meets 80% to 89% of the required formatting elements in the assignment description. Additionally, the presented information meets all the necessary components and formatting requirements. 16 to >14.0 pts Fair The assignment meets 70% to 79% of the required formatting elements in the assignment description. However, the presented information is missing some key details, but overall does not disrupt the required format. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor The assignment meets at most 69% of the required formatting elements in the description. The presented information is missing some key details that disrupt the needed formatting. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Critical and Logical Thinking Thought analysis process |
20 to >18.0 pts Excellent The assignment meets 90% to 100% of rudimentary and complex details, situations, problems, and diagnosis awareness that are accurate and correctly documented. In addition, the analysis offers a clear and concise analysis along with an impeccable and precise, well-thought process. 18 to >16.0 pts Good The assignment meets 80% to 89% of rudimentary and complex details, situations, problems, and diagnosis awareness which are accurate and correctly documented. The analysis is well communicated, and the fundamental thought process presented in the written piece clearly aligns with the assignment expectations. 16 to >14.0 pts Fair The assignment satisfies 70% to 79% of rudimentary and complex details, situations, problems, or diagnosis awareness but may overlook some essential parameters. The analysis and thought process presented in the written piece is evident; however, still developing. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor The assignment meets at most 69% of rudimentary details, situations, problems, or diagnosis awareness, but there was a severe overlook of some essential parameters. In addition, the analysis and thought process presented in the written piece is not evident and not founded on previous discussions or information. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Academic Literacy Quality of Sources and APA Citations |
20 to >18.0 pts Excellent Supporting information is pertinent to the topic, up to date (depending on what is acceptable in the field), from credible and trusted sources, and the number of sources meets the requested amount. Additionally, all sources are recognized or cited properly. 18 to >16.0 pts Good Supporting information is pertinent to the topic, however, 1 source is not a credible and trusted source; they may or may not be the most recent (depending on what is acceptable in the field). Additionally, the number of sources meets the requested amount. The essay offers correct formatting on the setup, and title page, with minimal formatting or punctuation errors within the in-text citations or references. 16 to >14.0 pts Fair Supporting information is pertinent to the topic, however, 2 or more sources are not credible and trusted sources; they may or may not be the most recent (depending on what is acceptable in the field). Additionally, the number of sources meets the requested amount. The essay offers correct formatting, setup, and title page but has significant errors within in-text citations and references. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor The following criteria would apply, supporting information is not pertinent to the topic, none of the sources are from credible or trusted sources, or the number of sources requested was not met. The essay offers severe incorrect APA formatting, setup or missing title page, and/or problematic in-text citations and references. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted. |
20 pts |
Total Points: 100
