Angioplasty’s benefits are challenged. Further, more than 1 million heart cases each time suffer an angioplasty. The benefits of an angioplasty were challenged in a study of cases (2007 Annual Conference of the American. College of Cardiology, New Orleans). All the cases had substantial blockage of the highways but were medically stable. All were treated with drugs similar to aspirin and beta-blockers. Still, half the cases were aimlessly assigned to get an angioplasty, and half were not. After five years, the experimenter planted 211 of the. Cases in the angioplasty group had posterior heart attacks compared with 202 cases in the drug-only group. Do you agree with the study’s conclusion? “There was no significant difference in the rate of heart attacks for the two groups”? Support your answer with a 95-confidence interval.

Short Answer

Expert verified

There is insufficient evidence to indicate that (P1-P2) differs from 0 because the interval includes 0 as a possible value for(P1-P2).

Step by step solution

01

Step-by-Step Solution Step 1: Find the value of P1 and P2

The two samples represent independent binomial trials. The arbitrary binomial variables are the figures x1 and x2 of the 1145 and 1142 cases in the angioplasty group and drug-only group, respectively.

The results are epitomized in the table over.

We now calculate the sample proportions P1 and P2 .Of the dropouts in the 1st and 2nd group Independently.

P1=x1n1=2111145=0.1843P2=x2n2=2021142=0.1769

02

Difference between the drop rate of two group

A large sample 95% confidence interval for the difference (P1 - P2) between the drop rates of the two groups of exercisers is given by:

(P1P2)±za2×σ(p1p2)(P1P2)±za2×p1q1n1+p2q2n2

Substituting the sample quantities yields

(0.18430.1769)±1.96(0.1843)(0.8157)1145+(0.1769)(0.8231)1142

=- 0.00740.03153

= (- 0.02413, - 0.03893)

03

Confident intervals

The interval can be interpreted as follows:

With a confidence coefficient equal to 0.95, we estimate that the difference in the rate of the heart attacks between the cases in the angioplasty group and the cases in the medication-only group falls in the interval from -0.02431 to 0.03893.

In other words, we estimate (with 95% confidence) the rate of heart attack for the medication-only group to be anywhere from 2.413% less than to 3.893% more than the heart attack rate for the angioplasty group.

04

Final answer

There is insufficient evidence to indicate that (P1-P2)differs from 0 because the interval includes 0 as a possible value for (P1-P2).

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

Consider the discrete probability distribution shown here.

x

10

12

18

20

p

.2

.3

.1

.4

a. Calculateμ,σ2 andσ .

b. What isP(x<15) ?

c. Calculate μ±2σ .

d. What is the probability that xis in the interval μ±2σ ?

Independent random samples from normal populations produced the results shown in the next table.

Sample 1


Sample 2

1.23.11.72.83.0

4.22.73.63.9

a. Calculate the pooled estimate of σ2.

b. Do the data provide sufficient evidence to indicate that μ21? Test using α=.10.

c. Find a 90% confidence interval for (μ1μ2).

d. Which of the two inferential procedures, the test of hypothesis in part b or the confidence interval in part c, provides more information about (μ1μ2)?

Question: Performance ratings of government agencies. The U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) requires government agencies to produce annual performance and accounting reports (PARS) each year. A research team at George Mason University evaluated the quality of the PARS for 24 government agencies (The Public Manager, Summer 2008), where evaluation scores ranged from 12 (lowest) to 60 (highest). The accompanying file contains evaluation scores for all 24 agencies for two consecutive years. (See Exercise 2.131, p. 132.) Data for a random sample of five of these agencies are shown in the accompanying table. Suppose you want to conduct a paired difference test to determine whether the true mean evaluation score of government agencies in year 2 exceeds the true mean evaluation score in year 1.

Source: J. Ellig and H. Wray, “Measuring Performance Reporting Quality,” The Public Manager, Vol. 37, No. 2, Summer 2008 (p. 66). Copyright © 2008 by Jerry Ellig. Used by permission of Jerry Ellig.

a. Explain why the data should be analyzedusing a paired difference test.

b. Compute the difference between the year 2 score and the year 1 score for each sampled agency.

c. Find the mean and standard deviation of the differences, part

b. Use the summary statistics, part c, to find the test statistic.

e. Give the rejection region for the test using a = .10.

f. Make the appropriate conclusion in the words of the problem.

4.134 Refer to Exercise 4.133. Find the following probabilities:

a.P(20x30)b.P(20<x30)c.P(x30)d.P(x45)e.(x40)f.(x<40)g.P(15x35)h.P(21.5x31.5)

Question: Deferred tax allowance study. A study was conducted to identify accounting choice variables that influence a manager’s decision to change the level of the deferred tax asset allowance at the firm (The Engineering Economist, January/February 2004). Data were collected for a sample of 329 firms that reported deferred tax assets in 2000. The dependent variable of interest (DTVA) is measured as the change in the deferred tax asset valuation allowance divided by the deferred tax asset. The independent variables used as predictors of DTVA are listed as follows:

LEVERAGE: x1= ratio of debt book value to shareholder’s equity

BONUS: x2 = 1 if firm maintains a management bonus plan,

0 if not

MVALUE: x3 = market value of common stock

BBATH: x4 = 1 if operating earnings negative and lower than last year,

0 if not

EARN: x5 = change in operating earnings divided by total assets

A first-order model was fit to the data with the following results (p-values in parentheses):

Ra2 = .280

y^=0.044+0.006x1-0.035x2-0.001x3+0.296x4+0.010x5

(.070) (.228) (.157) (.678) (.001) (.869)

  1. Interpret the estimate of the β coefficient for x4.
  2. The “Big Bath” theory proposed by the researchers’ states that the mean DTVA for firms with negative earnings and earnings lower than last year will exceed the mean DTVA of other firms. Is there evidence to support this theory? Test using α = .05.
  3. Interpret the value of Ra2.
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