Essay about Case Study

University of Texas-Houston Health Science Center . (2013). Hypothesis Testing . Retrieved March 21, 2013, from Biostatistics for the Clinician : http://www.uth.tmc.edu/uth_orgs/educ_dev/oser/L2_2.HTM

When investigating this experiment I found many different types of antiseptics all with different effects on bacteria and the effectiveness of all these antiseptics varied. I found

However, treatment four, 0.1296 (±0.608), represents that the mean was extraneous from what it should be (Table 1). The t-tests show how different the mean is in each treatment.

* The F-value suggests that there is a significant difference between the results of the control and treatment groups. The P-value of 0.005 is < the alpha of 0.05. This suggest that the groups are significantly different and the null hypothesis should be rejected.

The mean severity for renal disease for the research subjects is increased after the treatment in both the experimental and control group but there is only a slight increase in the mean value for control group which does not seem significant. If we look at the overall mean score of baseline and posttest we can say that the posttest mean score is increased with

The null hypothesis should be rejected that there is no difference between treatment methods because the calculation show that the treatments are statistically different.

duplicate entries, the research for this task was narrowed down to twelve articles relevant to the

* The p-value= 0.282. The p-value is another complementary and equally valid way we can evaluate the null and alternative hypotheses is by looking at the p-value and compare the p-value to alpha. If the p-value is less than alpha, reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative

Results will be derived from a chi-square analysis. We’ll conduct the experiment with the assumption that

To answer this question, a multiple day experiment was conducted to determine whether there is merit to the use of certain natural treatments to treat a bacterial infection by comparing to antibiotics that are known to be effective.

This is not relevant to the study as the study is observation of patients already infected and studies outcome results not infection methods.

Limitation of the study: Based on Magalhaes et al. (2012), accuracy in detecting the illness was not identified, the perpetual utilization of the heterogeneous therapeutic regimen. An active control study was included in the meta- analysis study, and there is no inactive treatment performed.

levofloxacin-based triple therapy which includes a 10-day triple therapy regimen of PPI, 500 mg levofloxacin and 1g amoxicillin (Liou et al., 2010). A bismuth quadruple therapy has also been perscribed as a second line of treatment. Two studies by Saad et al. (2006) and Gisbert and Morena (2006) showed that the eradication rate of levofloxacin-based triple therapy was superior to the bismuth-based quadruple therapy (Saad et al., 2006; Gisbert and Morena, 2006). However, the cure rate following this therapy seems to be decreasing (Zullo et al., 2010). Studies suggested that the choice of second-line treatment should based on which treatment approach was used initially if a clarithromycin-based regimen was used in the first line therapy, a metronidazole-based treatment (or at least a clarithromycin-free regimen) should be used afterwards (Battaglia et al.,

Comparing the MICs of the antibiotics in combination to the MICs of the antibiotic alone:

The statistical test used will be a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare the theory results. Two-way ANOVA classification will provide the necessary data on treatment effects and comparison of their