BME100 f2016:Group2 W1030AM L3

From OpenWetWare

Jump to: navigation, search
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
Image:BME494_Asu_logo.png


Contents

OUR TEAM

Name: Lauren Gustafson
Name: Lauren Gustafson
Name: Joel Reynoso
Name: Joel Reynoso
Name: Maribel Diaz
Name: Maribel Diaz
Name: Danielle Mara
Name: Danielle Mara
Name: Merin Jacob
Name: Merin Jacob
Name: Your name
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

Description of image

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

Description of image




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

Description of image


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

Description of image

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.

Personal tools