BME100 f2014:Group8 L3
 BME 100 Fall 2014
|
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 | ||||||
| |||||||
OUR TEAM
LAB 3A WRITE-UPDescriptive Statistics
When it comes to temperature, this fairly drastic difference in standard deviation (14.75397 degrees for gold standard and 2.99257 degrees for Spree) can be attributed to the fact that the Spree device does not measure exact temperature. Rather, it measures approximate ranges. This provides significantly less accurate data than the Gold Standard thermometer which provides an exact temperature for each reading. The temperature data used for the Spree band was approximated to certain given degree values, and substituted in for the ranges (1,2,4, and 4). This allowed for the analysis of actual temperatures rather than ranges, but also provided false data, in a way. The ranges obtained from the Spree device were mostly the same value, so the same temperature value was averaged in multiple times. This would explain why the spree seemed to be much more consistent in measuring temperature than the Gold Standard thermometer. For heart rate, the standard deviation of the gold standard (20.50269 bpm) and Spree band (21.46775 bpm) were actually quite similar. This would indicate that the Spree was relatively accurate in measuring heart rate. Though the values themselves are rather unimpressive (a variance of 20 bpm is a large range), in comparison to the gold standard, the Spree is very accurate, and the range of values can be attributed to human error.
=ResultsAnalysis
When a t-test was run on the heart rate data, there was show to be a value of .216. This showed that while the data sets were correlated in some way, they were not entirely connected. After a Pearson's test was run on the same data, an r-value of -.074 was recorded. This shows that there is a very minor negative correlation in the data. These together show that while the device is close to the gold standard, the Spree headband is not extremely reliable. When a t-test was run on the temperature data, a value of 4.03 x 10^-56 was found. This shows that there is only an infinitesimally small correlation between these data sets. This value shows that the device is not even remotely reliable when it comes to measuring temperature data. When this device is looked at as a whole, showing both temperature and heart rate data, the Spree Headband is not a reliable measure of body status. This is due in part to the location, external, as well as the fact that the device gives only a slider bar instead of a number for both temperature and heart rate.
Summary/DiscussionWhile using the Spree headband, there were a few flaws we noticed with the design of this object. One of the most apparent flaw contained in this headband is the fact that it doesn't measure the exact temperature, but instead gives a range of what the temperature is closest to. This does not create accurate results as it only picks a certain range the temperature is around. The second design flaw noticed in this product is that it measures off temperature based off the user's skin, and not directly. This is not accurate because the skin does not depict the actual temperature of the user, since it can easily be affected by the environmental temperature. Another design flaw noticed while conducting this experiment is that is very uncomfortable and does not stay in place. For this product to be effective, it needs to be comfortable for the user so they wouldn't mind wearing it. To make this product better, there are many steps that can be taken. One measure that can be taken is to make the headband more appealing to the eye so more people would wear it and not mind it looking bad in public. LAB 3B WRITE-UPTarget Population and Need
Device Design
Inferential Statistics
Graph
|
|||||||
