51.2k views
3 votes
In​ randomized, double-blind clinical trials of a new​ vaccine, were randomly divided into two groups. Subjects in group 1 received the new vaccine while subjects in group 2 received a control vaccine. After the second​ dose, of subjects in the experimental group​ (group 1) experienced as a side effect. After the second​ dose, of of the subjects in the control group​ (group 2) experienced as a side effect. Does the evidence suggest that a higher proportion of subjects in group 1 experienced as a side effect than subjects in group 2 at the level of​ significance?

User AmmoPT
by
7.2k points

1 Answer

6 votes

Answer: YES.

the evidence supports this claim.

Explanation:

We have that from the complete information,

H0: p1 = p2

Ha : p1 > p2

N1 = 654, P1 = 103/654

N2 = 615, P2 = 52/615

First we have to check the states of typicality that is if n1p1 and n1*(1-p1) and n2*p2 and n2*(1-p2) all are more prominent than equivalent to 5 or not

N1*p1 = 103

N1*(1-p1) = 551

N2*p2 = 52

N2*(1-p2) = 563

All the conditions are met so we can utilize standard typical z table to direct the test

Test measurements z = (P1-P2)/standard mistake

Standard blunder = √{p*(1-p)}*√{(1/n1)+(1/n2)}

P = pooled extent = [(p1*n1)+(p2*n2)]/[n1+n2]

After replacement

Test measurements z = 3.97

From z table, P(Z>3.97) = 0.000036

Thus, P-Value = 0.000036

As the got P-Value is not exactly the given noteworthiness 0.01

We reject the invalid speculation

Thus, we have enough proof to help the claim.that a higher extent of subjects in bunch 1 experienced drowsiness.

cheers I hope this helped !!

User HumanityANDpeace
by
8.2k points
Welcome to QAmmunity.org, where you can ask questions and receive answers from other members of our community.

9.4m questions

12.2m answers

Categories