BME100 f2016:Group9 W1030AM L3

BME 100 Fall 2016	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 Name: Your name Name: Your name Name: Your name Name: Your name Name: Your name Name: Your name LAB 3 WRITE-UP Descriptive Stats and Graph Standard Deviation: Heart Rate - Gold Standard: 23.03054395 Spree: 24.83748725 Temperature - Gold Standard: 1.91846255 Spree: 0.870378299 Mean: Heart Rate - Gold Standard: 98.08976898 Spree: 98.94078947 Temperature - Gold Standard: 96.6526994 Spree: 95.5308642 Correlation Coefficient: Pulse Ox(Heart Rate) - 0.690806489 Thermometer: 0.19279809 Inferential Stats T test: Heart Rate: 0.427116193 Temperature: 1.09676 x 10-21 Spree on Heart rate: Based on the data, we have concluded that the spree device is quite accurate when measuring heart rate. The standard deviation was quite high, but then again, we were measuring the two groups at pre/walking, walking, and at cooldown. When looking at the bar graphs, the average and the standard deviation range were almost identical. When we measured the Pearsons correlation coefficient, we found it to be at about 0.7 which is rather close to 1. When plotting the numbers in a scatter plot, they gave a relatively linear shape. This showed us that there was a correlation between the gold-standard measurements and the spree headband. Although there were some outliers at 0, for the most part, the scatter plot was quite consistent. Lastly, the t -test value was much larger than 0.05, and was measured to be at a value of about 0.43. Because the value is greater than 5%, it tells us that the spree headband is capable of measuring heart rate quite accurately, and there isn’t a significant difference between its measurement and the measurements of the gold standard. Summary of Spree Temperature measurements: Compared to the Gold Standard of temperature measurement the Spree has very poor performance. Looking at the data there is a significant difference between the mean and the standard deviations. When the Spree headband was plotted against the gold standard of taking body temperature on a scatter plot there was almost no correlation with the Pearson correlation coefficient being about 0.1928 which being close to zero means there is no correlation between the Spree Headband and the gold standard. When the two-tailed T-test was performed the value we got was extremely small on the order of 10-21, which shows that the Spree Headband took very poor body temperature measurements. With the data that we analyzed we came to the conclusion that the Spree headband should not be used to take body temperature readings because it simply does not take measurements with any accuracy regardless of the activity type, be it resting or during some type of exercise. Design Flaws and Recommendations Aesthetics A lot of the people in the market for a heart rate monitor would not want to wear a headband that looks like this. It is unattractive and bulky looking We recommend making it a chest or arm band instead of a headband Fit The headband would have trouble fitting under many helmets. Although it works for a cycling helmet, a ski, snowboard, or climbing helmet would prevent you from wearing it Given that a lot of heat is dissipated through the head, wearing a headband can be uncomfortable during exertion. Again, we recommend making it a chest or arm band instead of a headband Connection From reviews online, users tend to have trouble with the connection between their headbands and digital apps. Especially for people using later IOS systems, the app does not perform well. We recommend improving the app so it will work for newer IOS systems. Battery The battery life of spree headband is really short. Ideally it would last 6-8 hours after it is fully charged, but in real life its battery life is shorter. Again, we recommend making it a chest band. This would allow for more room for a battery Experimental Design of Own Device Our device has 2 main functions, so we will test each with a separate experiment. Experiment 1: Tamperproofing Experimental group: patients using our medicine dispenser Gold standard group: The leading brand of tamper proof medicine dispenser, the e-pill compumed Experiment procedure: Load one of our devices and a e-pill compumed with placebo pills Set both devices to never dispense Have half the patients take home each device for one month Instruct the patients to attempt to extract as many pills as possible from the device, but to save them instead of consuming them Record the number of pills extracted from the device Switch which device each patient has and repeat Experiment 2: Dose on time Experimental group: patients using our medicine dispenser Gold standard group: same group of patients using weekly pill organizer Experiment procedure: Have the experimental group take their medication using our medicine dispenser for a month. Record the exact time they take each dosage. Then let the same group of patients use weekly pill organizer to remind them to take medicine. Record the exact time they take each dosage also. Compare the two sets of data and analyze them.