Loading...

The Difference in Relative Risk (RR) of Lung Cancer between the Intervention and Control Groups

/, Research Design, statistical analysis/The Difference in Relative Risk (RR) of Lung Cancer between the Intervention and Control Groups
The Difference in Relative Risk (RR) of Lung Cancer between the Intervention and Control Groups 2017-06-02T21:02:40+00:00

Project Description

Project Brief

The purpose of this study was to compare the difference in relative risk (RR) of lung cancer between the intervention and control groups. The hypothesis was: The intervention group will have an increase in relative risk (RR) of lung cancer from pre to post while the control group will have no statistically significant change or may actually decrease. We conducted a repeated measure ANOVA to test the hypothesis for this study. We cannot conclude that the intervention group has an increase in relative risk (RR) of lung cancer from pre to post while the control group has no statistically significant change.

Contact Us

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to compare the difference in relative risk (RR) of lung cancer between the intervention and control groups. The hypothesis was: The intervention group will have an increase in relative risk (RR) of lung cancer from pre to post while the control group will have no statistically significant change or may actually decrease.

Methods


We conducted a repeated measure ANOVA to test the hypothesis for this study. We performed three statistical tests at once in the present study (i.e., one for each of the two possible main effects and one for the possible interaction effect).

 

Descriptive Statistics

The majority of participants were White (n= 64; 83.1%). There were more girls (n=44; 57.1%) than boys (n=33; 42.9%).

ANOVA

The repeated measure ANOVA did not reveal an interaction effect of group and time.  It indicates that there is no effect of the interventions on the difference between groups over two points. Thus, the study cannot conclude that intervention group has an increase in relative risk (RR) of lung cancer from pre to post while the control group has no statistically significant change.

 

0
Team Members
0
Days of Production
0
Cups of Coffee
0
Current Downloads

The Assumption of Normality

We conducted a statistical test of the assumption of normality by calculating skeswness and kurtosis. For both kurtosis and skewness, values between -2 and +2 are considered “acceptable,” indicating that the level of kurtosis or skewness is consistent with that of a normal distribution.  These tests were necessary in order to determine whether ANOVA could be used to compare the sample. In the study, the skewness and kurtosis for the variables are within the values range of -2 through +2. Thus, the data have a normal distribution.

Excellent Results

The repeated measure ANOVA did not reveal a main effect of group. It indicates that the comparison group is not different from the treatment group. The repeated measure ANOVA did not reveal a main effect of time. It indicated that subjects overall did not have different levels of performance on the second point rather than the first point. The repeated measure ANOVA did not reveal an interaction effect of group and time.  It indicates that there is no effect of the interventions on the difference between groups over two points. Thus, the study cannot conclude that intervention group has an increase in relative risk (RR) of lung cancer from pre to post while control group has no statistically significant change or may actually decrease.

 

We’re Here To Help Your Business Blast Off!

Through Creative Ideas, Innovation & Sheer Determination

Let’s Get Started!