# BME100 f2015:Group10 1030amL3

BME 100 Fall 2015 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

# LAB 3A WRITE-UP

## Descriptive Statistics

Heart Rate

  Gold Standard


Mean: 88.925 bpm

Standard Deviation: 23.23 bpm

Standard Error: 1.212 bpm

 Spree


Mean: 88.308 bpm

Standard Deviation: 22.99 bpm

Standard Error: 1.200 bpm

Temperature

     Gold Standard


Mean: 97.25276 degrees F

Standard deviation: 1.16813 degrees F

Standard error: 0.060322 degrees F

     Spree


Mean: 99.25642 degrees F

Standard deviation: 1.353782 degrees F

Standard error: 0.069909 degrees F

## Analysis

Heart Rate The data between the gold standard data and the spree measurements is closely related as determined by the T-test. The p-value obtained was 0.4. The value is over 0.05 which means that we fail to reject the null hypothesis which means we cannot say that the two sets of data are different. The Pearson's r-value we obtained was 0.823 which means that it is not completely correlated but they are very close in correlation since this value is very close to 1. For every increase in heart rate according to the gold standard, there is a nearly equal increase in spree heart rate values.

Temperature The p-value obtained for the gold standard data and the spree data was 3.442E-74. The value is much less than 0.05 which means we can reject the null hypothesis and say that the two sets of data are different. The Pearson's r value we obtained was 0.13, which means that there is a very weak correlation between the gold standard data and the spree data.

## Summary/Discussion

Heart Rate:

The values for the Spree heart rate monitor and the Gold Standard were fairly similarly correlated, judging by the high Pearson's R correlation of 0.823. This could be better correlated, however, and ideally would be the same measurements for each. The heart rate monitor could benefit from greater accuracy. The standard deviations were around the same, so precision is not a problem for the Spree headband. The raw readings were also true to the Gold Standard, as shown by the high p-value on the student's t-test of 0.390, indicating that we cannot claim that they are significantly different from each other. In summary, while the heart rate monitor on the Spree headband has good accuracy and precision, the correlation with the Gold Standard could be improved. This could be accomplished by using the same process of heart rate monitoring that the pulse oximeter uses, or adjusting for the difference numerically.

Temperature:

Both the p-value from the t-test (4.722E-74) and Pearson's r (0.13) indicated that there was very little correlation between the spree data and the gold standard data. A contributing factor to this could have been the fact that the Spree Band did not provide exact values for temperature, but rather rated temperature on a scale of 1 to 4. If the Spree Bands could be programmed to provide an exact temperature value, the correlation would likely by higher. As of now, the results of the experiment show that the Spree Band is not a suitable measure of body temperature.

# LAB 3B WRITE-UP

## Target Population and Need

Target Population: Anyone above the age of eight would be ideal for the product as people younger might not want or find use for it. Focus is placed on those who currently exercise outdoors in activities such as running or other outdoor sports. People interested in this device would include those who own a fitness monitor or want to own one but are hesitant due to the bulk or fashion limitations. We would want to target those who are interested in a fashionable fitness monitor because our product is designed to retain the accuracy of a more traditional fitness monitor while also prioritizing minimalist design and unintrusive function.

Need: This would be of use to anyone over the age of eight who wants an all-inclusive exercise monitor with a multitude of features for a workout. while they exercise to ensure they are meeting their workout needs and staying healthy. It would fulfill the need for a fashionable and accurate fitness and health status monitor while being able to track their progress and achievement during a workout. There is also a great need for those who enjoy exercising outdoors but live in a very hot climate, as the device would be able to tell them if their temperature or dehydration levels reached past a set safety point, as well as being able to protect their eyesight from harmful ultraviolet rays.

## Device Design

• Note: Calorie intake includes resistance meter. Temperature is sensed when in contact with skin.

## Inferential Statistics

Gold Standard vs Eyenalyze

Heart Rate:

Pearson's R: 0.9941295543

T-test: 0.9359014524

Body Temperature:

Pearson's R: 0.9630522205

T-test: 0.7695898988

Calories Exerted:

Pearson's R: 0.9999720695

T-test: 0.9921419326

Resistance of Sweat:

Pearson's R: 0.9999976695

T-test: 0.9978073966

All of the values for the Pearson's R were very close to 1, meaning that the Gold Standard compared to the Eyenalyze was very positively correlated and can be said to match the trend of the Gold Standard very closely. The T-tests were also above the alpha value of 0.05 many times over, indicating that there is no discernable significant difference between the measurements taken with the Gold Standards and the measurements taken with the Eyenalyze device. In conclusion, the Eyenalyze device is shown to be very true to the Gold Standards set by conventional methods of measurement.

## Graph

No statistically significant difference was determined between the gold standard and the Eyenalyze device in any of the categories.