BME100 f2017:Group15 W1030 L3

BME 100 Fall 2017	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 Cole Alvarez Kylie I. Mercer Nathan Moorman Kassandra Sanchez Lauren Seliger LAB 3 WRITE-UP Descriptive and Inferential Stats and Graphs Heart Rate of Pulse Ox and Spree Gold Standard: Average: 98.08976898 Standard Deviation: 23.03054395 Correlation Coefficient: 0.19287301522 T-Test P-Value: 0.427116193 Spree: Average: 98.95379538 Standard Deviation: 24.87753802 Temperature of Gold Standard and Spree Gold Standard: Average: 96.64716049 Standard Deviation: 1.922602071 Correlation Coefficient: 0.69079664156 T-Test P-Value: 1.09676E-21 Spree: Average: 95.5308642 Standard Deviation: 0.870378299 Summary of Results Heart Rate of Pulse Ox and Spree Based on the results of the scatter plot for the average heart rate (in beats per minute), there is a weak, positive correlation (R = 0.193) between the Spree model and the Gold Standard. Upon calculating a t-test between the two devices, the results were found to be significant at the α = 0.05 significance level since the Spree model had a p-value of about 1.097E-21. This data provides convincing evidence that the Spree can accurately measure the average heart rate of humans. Temperature of Oral Thermometer and Spree Based on the results of the scatter plot for the average temperature, there is a strong, positive correlation (R = 0.691) between the Spree model and the Gold Standard. Upon calculating a t-test between the two devices, the Spree model had a p-value of about 0.427. From this, there is not convincing evidence that, at the α = 0.05 significance level, the Spree model is comparable to the Gold Standard in recording the average human body temperature, meaning it is not accurate. Design Flaws and Recommendations Based on the data above, the spree device is not a very specific and adequate way of measuring a person’s temperature and heart rate. One possible design flaw for this experiment is that the trial did not use random sampling. The trial took place on a college campus, therefore, the majority of the people participating would have a healthy heart rate. If the trial used random sampling, there would be people of all ages participating in the trial. Therefore, the data of average heart rate would be significantly more accurate. Another possible design flaw in this experiment would be the use of the oral thermometer. Using an oral thermometer to take a person's temperature is not very accurate. A better alternative for checking the participant's temperature would be through a digital thermometer or an ear thermometer. The digital thermometer uses electronic heat sensors to measure the body's temperature. This is much more precise than an oral thermometer. Using an oral thermometer averages about .5 degrees F to 1.0 degrees F below rectal, ear, and temporal readings, but not only that, but taking oral temperatures after eating or drinking also affect the accuracy of the sample. Works Cited: "Thermometers: Understand the Options." Mayo Clinic. Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research, 12 Sept. 2015. Web. Tousseau, Jennifer. “What Is the Most Accurate Way to Take a Temperature? Is Oral, Temporal, Ear, or Rectal Best?” Systemic Autoinflammatory Disease (SAID) Support, 13 May 2017, saidsupport.org/what-is-the-most-accurate-way-to-take-a-temperature-is-oral-temporal-ear-or-rectal-best/. Experimental Design of Own Device For the thermal therapy device, multiple temperatures will be taken in order to prove consistency. The goal is for the device to have 95% precision rate in achieving a target temperature. The data will be collected using a separate thermometer, and recorded on an excel sheet. The standard deviation for this experiment is expected to be fairly large (s = due to the fact that it will be both heating and cooling, which would increase the spread between all of the data points. The average value of the data would be larger as well because of the variation in temperature. The correlation of the data would be positive because the temperature goes from low to high and vice versa. In the trial, random sampling would be applied. From every state in the US, two physical therapy offices will be chosen at random and from each of these offices one patient will be chosen to participate in the trial. Having the sample spread out across the country makes the sample fairly representative of the American population that uses heating or cooling pads to treat chronic pain. From every state in the US, two physical therapy offices will be chosen at random and from each of these offices one patient will be chosen to participate in the trial. Thus making the trials more representative of the population, more specifically involving Americans who use heating or cooling pads to treat chronic pain. The participants would use the device for a period of three weeks. In that time, they will record how the temperature of the device feels and what their level of chronic pain is from the beginning to the end of the three weeks. They will rank their pain levels once a day. This way, by the end of the three weeks, they will be able to look back on their progress throughout the trial.