BME100 f2013:W900 Group5 L2

From OpenWetWare

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Summary/Discussion)
Current revision (10:07, 18 September 2013) (view source)
(Summary/Discussion)
 
Line 85: Line 85:
The study of the fact of LPS on inflammation in rats was conducted on 10 rats. 5 rats were not dosed i.e (0mg) the other five were dosed with 10mg of LPS.  With only 10 data points we will not yield quality data of statistical significance. For the control group 0mg the average inflammation produced is 10.516.  The average for the second group, 10mg was 11.112 average inflammation produced. These two numbers are less than one apart. This does not bode well for the effectiveness of LPS on inflammation. The standard deviation is high and there is no consistency in the numbers. For instance in the 10mg Group the lowest level of inflammation was 3.55 and the highest 22.34. That is a very large spread for just five participants. What I am trying to get at is there is very little consistency in this study. As it turns out the T-test shows that there is no significance. And not surprisingly the post-hoc T-test also showed no significance. Although this test does not show significance, you could theorize that if you threw out outlier numbers in the 10mg group or just use more participants your results could look drastically different.  
The study of the fact of LPS on inflammation in rats was conducted on 10 rats. 5 rats were not dosed i.e (0mg) the other five were dosed with 10mg of LPS.  With only 10 data points we will not yield quality data of statistical significance. For the control group 0mg the average inflammation produced is 10.516.  The average for the second group, 10mg was 11.112 average inflammation produced. These two numbers are less than one apart. This does not bode well for the effectiveness of LPS on inflammation. The standard deviation is high and there is no consistency in the numbers. For instance in the 10mg Group the lowest level of inflammation was 3.55 and the highest 22.34. That is a very large spread for just five participants. What I am trying to get at is there is very little consistency in this study. As it turns out the T-test shows that there is no significance. And not surprisingly the post-hoc T-test also showed no significance. Although this test does not show significance, you could theorize that if you threw out outlier numbers in the 10mg group or just use more participants your results could look drastically different.  
-
However, the study of the LPS production on humans yielded a different result due to the fact that they all showed a significant change in the LPS production by each dosage. Yet, the 15mg dosage seemed to give the largest increase per/mg but also had the largest amount of variance between the test subjects.
+
However, the study of the LPS production on humans yielded a different result due to the fact that they all showed a significant change in the LPS production by each dosage. Yet, the 15mg dosage seemed to give the largest increase per/mg but also had the largest amount of variance between the test subjects. The average value of LPS produced by a 0mg dosage was 3.834, 5mg was 8.932, 10 mg was 61.662 and finally 15 mg was 657.941. Now since all of these values carry a significance difference from one another, just by looking st the average LPS alone, the 15mg dose easily produced the most LPS, even considering the large amount of variance.
(Please discuss the results and statistical analysis from both experiments.  State your conclusion.)<br>
(Please discuss the results and statistical analysis from both experiments.  State your conclusion.)<br>

Current revision

BME 100 Fall 2013 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: Lincoln(Grady) Bain
Name: Lincoln(Grady) Bain
Name: Andrew Olson
Name: Andrew Olson
Name: Pedro Giorge
Name: Pedro Giorge
Name: Niko Vlastos
Name: Niko Vlastos
Name: Omar Alsubhi
Name: Omar Alsubhi

LAB 2 WRITE-UP

Descriptive Satistics

Rat Trials
Image:stats1.jpg Image:stats2.jpg

Human Trials

Image:Lab II Data.png

This is a data table that states the average,standard deviation, endpoint and the standard error for the different dosage levels that range from 0mg-15mg at intervals of 5mg.


(Please report descriptive statistics for both experiments. Please calculate descriptive statistics in Excel.)




Results

Human Trials
Description of image
This graph displays the effect of certain doses of LPS on Inflammotin production


Experiment 2 Image:rat.jpg
This displays the limited animal testing of the drug and it's ramifications.



Analysis

Rat trials

Image:Screen Shot 2013-09-12 at 9.03.34 PM.png

Image:Screen_Shot_2013-09-12_at_9.38.48_PM.png

Human Trials

Image:ANOVA.png


Image:Post hoc.png

This is a table for the analysis of the ANOVA test then we tsted for the P-value of variance and discovered that all values and comparisons showed that between all the tested values, a commonality was shown that they all contained a significant difference after T-testing them individually. (Using inferential statistics, please determine statistically significant differences in the data.)





Summary/Discussion

Right Test Summary and Discussion

The study of the fact of LPS on inflammation in rats was conducted on 10 rats. 5 rats were not dosed i.e (0mg) the other five were dosed with 10mg of LPS. With only 10 data points we will not yield quality data of statistical significance. For the control group 0mg the average inflammation produced is 10.516. The average for the second group, 10mg was 11.112 average inflammation produced. These two numbers are less than one apart. This does not bode well for the effectiveness of LPS on inflammation. The standard deviation is high and there is no consistency in the numbers. For instance in the 10mg Group the lowest level of inflammation was 3.55 and the highest 22.34. That is a very large spread for just five participants. What I am trying to get at is there is very little consistency in this study. As it turns out the T-test shows that there is no significance. And not surprisingly the post-hoc T-test also showed no significance. Although this test does not show significance, you could theorize that if you threw out outlier numbers in the 10mg group or just use more participants your results could look drastically different.

However, the study of the LPS production on humans yielded a different result due to the fact that they all showed a significant change in the LPS production by each dosage. Yet, the 15mg dosage seemed to give the largest increase per/mg but also had the largest amount of variance between the test subjects. The average value of LPS produced by a 0mg dosage was 3.834, 5mg was 8.932, 10 mg was 61.662 and finally 15 mg was 657.941. Now since all of these values carry a significance difference from one another, just by looking st the average LPS alone, the 15mg dose easily produced the most LPS, even considering the large amount of variance.

(Please discuss the results and statistical analysis from both experiments. State your conclusion.)







The work was about getting some statistics for the dosages considering humans with different ages, and rats.

Personal tools