Final answer:
The conclusion that the difference of means is significant, as supported by rerandomizations being outside the chance range, aligns with how statistical significance is evaluated in drug efficacy studies.
Step-by-step explanation:
The best conclusion supported by the data from the randomized study comparing Drug A and Drug B's effects on increasing a child's human growth hormone level is A. The difference of the means is significant because the rerandomizations show that it is outside the range of what likely happens by chance.
Statistical significance in experiments involving drug efficacy is critical because it helps determine whether a drug genuinely has the effects it is purported to have, or whether the observed effects could just be due to random chance. In this scenario, rerandomization has provided evidence that the difference observed is not something that would typically occur just by chance. With a deep understanding of statistical analysis, researchers can draw more reliable conclusions about drug efficacy.
Furthermore, it's important to note that statistical significance is often considered when there is less than a five percent chance that the observed differences are due to chance. The rerandomizations in this study indicate that the observed difference falls outside of this range, pointing toward a significant difference between Drug A and Drug B.