PHC 6055 Data Management and Epidemiologic Analysis Exam 1 Fall 2019

  • Post category:Nursing
  • Reading time:8 mins read
  • Post author:

PHC 6055 Data Management and Epidemiologic Analysis Exam 1 Fall 2019

Name: ____________________________________________________

ID:_________________

Instruction:

This is a 3 hours exam. You are giving an extra 30min to submit your exam. The clock start when you open the exam. Use this word document to provide your answers and copy and paste any supporting output or graph generated in SPSS. Once you are done submit back in canvas, as you usually do for the homework. No late submission will be accepted and the system will shut down after your time elapses. Consider the female health data set “FHEALTH” available on Canvas. Based on this data set answer all questions below 1- Consider the variable “Age”, based on this variable answer the following questions a- Report the mean, standard deviation, IQR, and skewness for the age variable. b- What is the shape of the variable age? c- Do you think that the variable age came from a normal distribution? Why? 2- Consider the variable “Height”, based on this variable answer the following questions. a- Construct a 99% confidence interval for the variable “Height”. b- Test if the mean Height is significantly different from 64 inches i- The test statistic is …………………………………………………………… ii- The degrees of freedom are ………………………………………………….. iii- The P value and conclusion …………………………………………………… 3- Suppose that a fire insurance company wants to relate the amount of fire damage in major residential fires to the distance between the burning house and the nearest fire station. The study is to be conducted in a large suburb of a major city. A sample of 14 recent fires in this suburb is selected. The amount of damage, y, and the distance between the fire and the nearest station, x, are given below. We are interested in building a regression model to predict fire damage y, given the distance from the fire x. Distance Damage 3.4 1.8 4.6 2.3 3.1 5.5 0.7 3.0 2.6 4.3 2.1 1.1 6.1 4.8 26.2 17.8 31.3 23.1 27.5 36.0 14.1 22.3 19.6 31.3 24.0 17.3 43.2 36.4 a- Find the Pearson and Spearman correlations between the distance from the fire station and the amount of damage. b- Is the predictor distance significant? What is the test statistic and p value? c- What is the amount of variation explained in the model? d- What is the standard error of the estimated regression line? e- Use the final regression equation to predict the damage caused by the fire that is 6.5 miles away from the nearest station. 4- In recent years, concerns have been expressed about adverse health effects from amalgam dental restorations, which include mercury. The table below shows results from a study in which some patients were treated with amalgam restorations and others were treated with composite restorations that don’t contain mercury. Use a 5% level of significance to test for independence between the type of restoration and sensory disorders. Do amalgam restorations appear to affect sensory disorders? Sensory Disorder No Sensory Disorder Amalgam 10 9 a- What is the value of your test statistics? Composite 7 15 b- What are the degrees of freedom for this test? c- What is the p value for this test? 5- Listed below are the amounts of carbon monoxide (mg/cigarette) in samples of king size, 100 mm menthol, and 100 mm non menthol cigarettes. Use 5% significance level to test the claim that the three categories of cigarettes yield the same amount of carbon monoxide (hint: One way ANOVA). King Size Menthol Non Menthol 16,16,16,16,16,17,16,15,16,14,16,16,16,16,16,14,16,16,14,18,15,16,14,16,16 15,17,19,9,17,17,15,17,15,17,17,15,17,17,18,11,18,3,17,14,15,22,16,7,9 4,19,17,18,18,13,17,15,15,12,18,17,18,16,3,18,15,18,15,17,15,15,7,16,14 a- What is the test statistic and p value to test the hypothesis that all means are the same? b- What is the test statistic and p value for Levene’s test for testing variances homogeneity for the groups? c- Perform a multiple testing process and state which groups are significantly different in their mean carbon monoxide.

  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