A drug company developed a new formula for their headache medication. To test the effectiveness of this new formula, 250 people
were randomly selected from a larger population of patients with headaches. 100 of these people were randomly assigned to receive the new formula medication when they had a headache, and the other 150 people received the old formula medication. The time it took, in minutes, for each patient to no longer have a headache was recorded. The results from both of these clinical trials are shown below. The next three questions present statements made by three different statistics students. For each statement, indicate whether you think the student s conclusion is valid.
1. The old formula works better. Two people who took the old formula felt relief in less than 20 minutes, compared to none who took the new formula. Also, the worst result - near 120 minutes - was with the new formula.
A. Valid.
B. Not valid.
2. The average time for the new formula to relieve a headache is lower than the average time for the old formula. I would conclude that people taking the new formula will tend to feel relief about 20 minutes sooner than those taking the old formula.
A. Valid.
B. Not valid.
3. I would not conclude anything from these data. The number of patients in the two groups is not the same so there is no fair way to compare the two formulas.
A. Valid.
B. Not valid.
1. The old formula works better. Two people who took the old formula felt relief in less than 20 minutes, compared to none who took the new formula. Also, the worst result - near 120 minutes - was with the new formula.
A. Valid.
B. Not valid.
2. The average time for the new formula to relieve a headache is lower than the average time for the old formula. I would conclude that people taking the new formula will tend to feel relief about 20 minutes sooner than those taking the old formula.
A. Valid.
B. Not valid.
3. I would not conclude anything from these data. The number of patients in the two groups is not the same so there is no fair way to compare the two formulas.
A. Valid.
B. Not valid.
1 answer:
Answer: correct is B
Step-by-step explanation:
Annex the bar graph that shows which improvement time is less, the new formula being more effective, with an average of 55 minutes and the average of the old formula is 75 minutes, which leads to the conclusion that the new formula is better than the previous one with a time difference of 20 minutes.
You might be interested in
Compounded contiously
A=future amount
P=present amount
r=rate in decimal
t=time in years
to find the interest, we do A-P
find A first
given
P=410
t=13
r=0.08
aprox
A=1159.97897
A-P=1159.97897-410=749.9789
the interest is $749.98
A=future amount
P=present amount
r=rate in decimal
t=time in years
to find the interest, we do A-P
find A first
given
P=410
t=13
r=0.08
aprox
A=1159.97897
A-P=1159.97897-410=749.9789
the interest is $749.98
Answer:
144 squared ft
Step-by-step explanation:
I think your question is missed of key information, allow me to add in and hope it will fit the original one.
Please have a look at the attached photo.
My answer:
Given the information:
- height - 3
- length - 11
- width - 4
- slant height - 5
As we know that, the ramp is a triangular Prism, so to find how much wood did it take to cover the ramp we need to find the total surface area of the triangular prism
1/ The area of the central rectangle
A = lw = 11*4 = 44 squared ft
2/ The area of the rectangle to the left
A = hw = 3*4 =12 squared ft
3/ The area of the rectangle to the right
A = slant height* length = 5*11 = 55 squared ft
4/ The area of the two triangles
A = 2 (1/2*h*l) = h*w = 3*11 = 33 squared ft
=> the total surface area of the ramp is: 44 + 12 + 55 + 33 = 144 squared ft
Hope it will find you well.
