HMGT 400 UMUC Research and Data Analysis in Health Care Excel Task

  • Post category:Nursing
  • Reading time:7 mins read
  • Post author:

HMGT 400 UMUC Research and Data Analysis in Health Care Excel Task

Description

Nursing homework help

 

Instructions

HMGT 400 Research and Data Analysis in Health Care-Exercise

Dataset:HMGTHOSP.csv (Please download dataset from the class.)

Required program: for all weeks EXCEL  (RStudio or R Programming for BONUS point seekers only).

Author, Hossein Zare, PhD

Citation: Zare, H. (2017). HMGT 400 Research and Data Analysis in Health Care-Exercise. UMGC.EDU

**For each exercise, Master RStudio relevant materials are posted (See the mini-module RStudio: Working toward the BONUS points

Copy Exercise # 1 from below or download the file for all week exercise from here: All Exercises HMGT 400.docx

Exercise # 1:

The attached dataset provides some information about hospitals in 2011 and 2012. Download the data, analyze it, then complete the descriptive table below. Please use the following format to report your findings.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics between hospitals in 2011 & 2012

Hospital Characteristics

2011

2012

p-value

N

Mean

St. Dev

N

Mean

St. Dev

1. Hospital beds

2. Number of paid Employees

3. Number of non-paid Employees

4. Total hospital cost ($)

5. Total hospital revenue ($)

6. Available Medicare days

7. Available Medicaid days

8. Total Hospital Discharges

9. Medicare discharges

10. Medicaid discharges

Round mean and st.dev figures to nearest whole number. use 2 decimal places for p values.

Based on your findings, in which year did hospitals have better performance? Please write a short paragraph describing your findings. Make sure to attach the plotted information.

Use Excel for calculations (mandatory)

(BONUS points: Use Master RStudio script is available for this exercise, but you need to modify that for this analysis)

Download data from here: HMGT400HOSP

Download RStudio script from here:E1-Codes

Download RStudio script from here (If you were not able to load the DPLYR package use this scrip):E1-Codes-No-Dplyr

https://learn.umgc.edu/content/enforced/266713-027…

I did calculate the standard deviation and this is what I get for total hospital                 t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Equal Variances                                             2011   2012                Mean   216873321.5   214748023                Variance   9.27633E+16   86520419759122800      304570722.2   294143536       Observations   1505   1525                Pooled Variance   8.96213E+16                   Hypothesized Mean Difference   0                   df   3028                   t Stat   0.195387292                   P(T<=t) one-tail   0.422551437                   t Critical one-tail   1.645357008                   P(T<=t) two-tail   0.845102874                   t Critical two-tail   1.960747737

2012 Std —

294143536

2011 std

304570722.2

  Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

 

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

 

Supported by at least three credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

 

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

 

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Post is cited with two credible sources.

 

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 34 (34%)

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

 

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

 

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Contains only one or no credible sources.

 

Not written clearly or concisely.

 

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Post: Timeliness 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)

Posts main post by day 3.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not post by day 3.

First Response 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

15 (15%) – 16 (16%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

13 (13%) – 14 (14%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 12 (12%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 11 (11%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.

Total Points: 100