60% is your answer. Good luck!!
Answer:
x= -4
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
thx u xox ur so sweet
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
The sample size is too small
Step-by-step explanation:
The answer is the last one: the sample size is too small. Since we only got 3 subjects to test, maybe one of them could live for a long time after the diagnosis of Cacer and that made the average survival time go up by a lot.
In order to obtain results with a significance level higher, you need a sample size of at least 20 subjects.
Now lets see why other options wouldnt be good answers:
- For a small amount of subjects, it is unlikely to have errors in caculation
- The sample size is given
- We are not given information about the treatment and we dont even know if the subjects feel more confident with the new treatment. Also, if a Placebo effect works regularly, it shouldnt limit statistical sifgnificance
- An increase in 2 years is huge in comparison with the previous survival time.
Multiply 36 by 75 because they need to find how many yards they need
