BME100 s2016:Group10 W1030AM L3

From OpenWetWare
Jump to: navigation, search
Owwnotebook icon.png BME 100 Spring 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
BME494 Asu logo.png

TEAM EJCJGJ

Ekta Patel
Joe Schreiber
Jade Nelson
Jordan Todd
Curtis McLoud
Gavin Steeber

LAB 3A WRITE-UP

Descriptive Statistics

Based on the data obtained by the groups, the heart rate averages and standard deviations differed between the gold standard measurements and spree measurements. The spree average heart rate is 98.95 beats per minute, whereas the gold standard average heart rate is 98.05 beats per minute. The spree standard deviation is 24.88 beats per minute, whereas the gold standard standard deviation is 23.03 beats per minute. The spree standard error is 1.427 beats per minute, whereas the gold standard standard error is 1.321 beats per minute.

The data obtained in taking the temperature between the groups showed a difference between the temperature from an oral thermometer and the Spree headband. The average temperature according to the Spree headband was 95.53°F whereas the average temperature from the oral thermometer was 96.65°F. In terms of variability, the standard deviation for the Spree temperatures was 0.8704°F and the standard error was 0.05°F. For the oral thermometer, however, the standard deviation was 1.923°F and the standard error was 0.1°F.

Results

Graph of heart rate

Description of image

Table for Data

Analysis

The T-test was used in order to find the P-value in both the gold standard data and Spree headband data since there were only two groups of data being compared. The P-value found for the heart rate was 0.427 and the P-value found for the temperature was 1.097*10^-21. For the difference between the data sets to be statistically significant, the P-value had to be less than 0.05. Since the P-value for the heart rate data was larger than 0.05, the difference between the two measurements cannot be considered statistically significant. The P-value for the temperature data was much smaller than 0.05, so the difference between the Spree headband measurement and the gold standard measurement can be considered statistically significant.

Summary/Discussion

The Spree Headband has a few design flaws that are worth mentioning. The first design flaw was the difficulty in connecting the device via bluetooth. It would not be recommended not to use this product with a team sport or anywhere where there is a group of five or more in a small area. A suggestion to be made would be to give the Spree headbands a specific bluetooth name or make have the ability to give it a specific name that your phone can see. The next design flaw that was encountered was that after the Spree headband had been connected, in order to obtain the heart rate, the mobile device had to be placed directly against the Spree headband. A better way to connect this device to a mobile cell phone would be suggested. Something that is more reliable and stronger can be used to make this product easier to use. The next design flaw that was noted would be the range of temperature. The spree headband used a conversion from temperature in degrees Fahrenheit to various colors. This was found to not be a very accurate way of giving temperature and more of an “in the ballpark” range to help users know their temperature. The Spree Headband would be more significant if it gave the users an actual quantitative value for their body temperature.




LAB 3B WRITE-UP

Target Population and Need

The target population of this device would be anyone who undergoes stress and would be interested in preventing it before it gets worse. About 77% of people in the United States suffer from physical symptoms caused by stress. It is evident that at some point or another, individuals all around the globe have experienced stress. Specific groups of people who would benefit from this device include college students, employees with high-stress jobs, etc. About 115 million people (in the U.S.) experience stress, therefore these people would be our target population. Women are more stressed out than men, according to surveys administered by Carnegie Mellon. Additionally, the age group 35-54 experience more stress than other age groups. Based on these demographics our target population would be females ages 35-54 with high-stress jobs, however, ultimately, our device will be advertised to individuals who feel that they experience stress.

The target population would use this device to be notified before they experience stress. Using this detection device, individuals would prevent themselves from becoming stressed out. Consumers of the target population would need the device to have a long battery life, be wireless, possess a stress monitor, be easy to use, be affordable, and be attractive. Having a long battery device allows consumers to wear the device for long periods of time. It needs to be wireless because the device needs to be mobile for consumers to wear it throughout the day. The device has to have a monitor that is easy to read and consumers can understand. The device has to be affordable so that consumers are more inclined to purchase it. It also must look sleek and modern, so that consumers feel good and attractive when wearing it. The population would need to be notified in real-time if they are about to surpass and hit the stress threshold. Before they become stress, the device would notify the consumer, and they could perform certain activities (like yoga, taking a walk, taking medication, etc.) to prevent themselves from hitting the threshold.

Graph of heart rate



Device Design

Whether a College Student, Doctor, Pilot, or Stay at Home Mom, We’re All Just Chillin’ Description of image

Description of image Description of image Description of image

Inferential Statistics

For there to be a significant difference between two sets of data, the p-value found through a t-test must be less than 0.05. The p-value for the heart rate data was 0.79785. The p-value for cortisol levels was 0.57251. The p-value for the body temperature data was 0.16785. Since all of these p-values are greater than 0.05, there is no significant difference between the measurements from the gold standard and the Chill for heart rate, cortisol levels, or body temperature.

Graph

Avg heartrate.png

Trial tables.png

Gold cortisol.png

Gold vs chill.png

Avg cortisol graph.png

Avg temp graph.png