BME100 f2016:Group2 W1030AM L3

BME 100 Fall 2016	Home People Lab Write-Up 1 | Lab Write-Up 2 | Lab Write-Up 3 Lab Write-Up 4 | Lab Write-Up 5 | Lab Write-Up 6 Course Logistics For Instructors Photos Wiki Editing Help
OUR TEAM Name: Lauren Gustafson Name: Joel Reynoso Name: Maribel Diaz Name: Danielle Mara Name: Merin Jacob Name: Your name LAB 3 WRITE-UP Descriptive Stats and Graph Temperature Gold Standard vs. Spree Gold Standard Spree Average 96.7 95.5 Std. Dev. 1.918 0.870 Count 326 324 Std. Error 0.1063 0.0484 Heart Rate Gold Standard vs. Spree Gold Standard Spree Average 98.09668874 98.90397351 Std. Dev. 23.06845343 24.91488602 Count 302 302 Std. Error 1.327440329 1.433690585 Inferential Stats Temperature: Gold Standard v. Spree Pearson's C 0.1928 =about 0 No Correlation P-value 1.097E-21 p<0.05 Significant Difference Based on the data, it can be concluded that the Spree headband produces significantly different measures of temperature than the Gold Standard and that there is no correlation between the measurements obtained from each of the two devices. The p-value derived from the experimental data equaled 1.097E-21, which is much smaller than the comparative p-value of 0.05. This indicates that the measurements from each device are significantly different, meaning the Spree headband measurements were not accurate, assuming the Gold Standard measurements were. The calculated Pearson's correlation coefficient equaled 0.1928 for the temperature data, which can be rounded down to 0, showing no correlation between the Gold Standard measurements and the Spree measurements. Had the Spree obtained measurements similar to that of the Gold Standard, there would have been a positive correlation. Therefore, based off the data in this experiment, the Spree headband does not accurately measure the temperature of the user. Heart Rate: Gold Standard v. Spree Pearson's C 0.6135959583 =above 0 Positive Correlation P-value 0.4965766923 p>0.05 No Significant Difference According to the heart rate results, there was no significant difference between the Spree heart rate monitor and the gold standard which was achieved through conventional means of recording one’s heart rate. The standard error was .9 within each other and the p-value (.49657) was small enough to have no statistical significance in theory. With this it can be concluded that the Spree is reliable, and the graph showed a positive correlation between the measurements obtained from the Gold standard and the Spree. Design Flaws and Recommendations Design Flaws: -Sensor used to detect the user's heart rate and temperature is too loose. It can fall out. -Sensor could have problems detecting the rate and temperature being on the forehead. -Sensor might not work properly while covered in bodily fluids. Recommendations: -Make device waterproof or sweat resistant -Make device placement somewhere with easier access to pulse and temperature Experimental Design of Own Device We would create an experimental group with individuals that have mild to severe asthma. We would induce an asthma attack using a variety of triggers that the certain individual reacts to. Afterwards we would have them immediately use the Breathe Band. Afterwards we would then use a spirometer to measure lung capacity and airflow to see if the Breathe Band correctly delivers the medication. We would then survey the individuals and ask how they felt about the product, the survey would have a 1-10 scale, 1 being the absolute worse and 10 being the best and 0 not working at all (keep in mind there is paramedics and an ambulance available). The data would be collected and we would add them all up and divide it by the total amount of surveys to get the mean.