Question

1. To investigate whether giving chest-compression-only (CC) rather than standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to a heart attack patient will improve the victim's chance of surviving, researchers conducted 2500 trials. In each trial, the EMT present randomly assigned either CC or CPR at the site where a person had just experienced a heart attack. They found that of the 1,600 cases where CC had been given, 200 people had survived, whereas of the 900 cases where standard CPR had been given, the number was 180.
2. Identify the observational units. Choose one.
   1. Whether given CC or CPR instructions
   2. Whether heart attack victim survived or not
   3. Cases of heart attacks where emergency services were contacted
   4. Those people who survived
3. Identify the explanatory variable. Choose one.
   1. Whether given CC or CPR instructions
   2. Whether heart attack victim survived or not
   3. Cases of heart attacks where emergency services were contacted
   4. Those people who survived

1. Identify the response variable. Choose one.
   1. Whether given CC or CPR instructions
   2. Whether heart attack victim survived or not
   3. Cases of heart attacks where emergency services were contacted
   4. Those people who survived

2. In this context, which of the following is an (are) appropriate statistic value(s)? Choose all that apply.
   1. 200/1,600−180/900= -0.075
   2. 200/2500−180/2500= 0.008
   3. 200/1400−180/720= -0.107
   4. (200/1,600)/ (180/900) = 0.626

3. Which of the following is the appropriate null hypothesis? Choose one.
   1. Giving CC instructions is just as effective as giving CPR instructions at saving lives of heart attack victims.
   2. Giving CC instructions is more effective than giving CPR instructions at saving lives of heart attack victims.
   3. Giving CC instructions is less effective than giving CPR instructions at saving lives of heart attack victims.

4. Which of the following is the appropriate alternative hypothesis? Choose one.
   1. Giving CC instructions is just as effective as giving CPR instructions at saving lives of heart attack victims.
   2. Giving CC instructions is more effective than giving CPR instructions at saving lives of heart attack victims.
   3. Giving CC instructions is less effective than giving CPR instructions at saving lives of heart attack victims.
5. Use an appropriate randomization-based applet to find a p-value. Report and based on this p-value, what is the conclusion that we can get?
6. Use the 2SD method to find a 95% confidence interval for the parameter of interest. Report this interval and interpret the interval in the context of the study.

Answer 1

1) Identify the observational units. Choose one.

Ans: b. Whether heart attack victim survived or not

2) Identify the explanatory variable. Choose one.

Ans: a. Whether given CC or CPR instructions

3) Identify the response variable. Choose one.

Ans: b)Whether heart attack victim survived or not

4. In this context, which of the following is an (are) appropriate statistic value(s)? Choose all that apply.

Ans: a) 200/1,600−180/900= -0.075

d) (200/1,600)/ (180/900) = 0.626

5. Which of the following is the appropriate null hypothesis? Choose one.

Ans: a) Giving CC instructions is just as effective as giving CPR instructions at saving lives of heart attack victims.

6. Which of the following is the appropriate alternative hypothesis? Choose one.

Ans: b) Giving CC instructions is more effective than giving CPR instructions at saving lives of heart attack victims.

7. We can use Z-test for Two Proportions

8)