READ BELOW-
Case Study 1:
1. Support for the Statistical Method:
In this randomized controlled trial evaluating medication-adherence diFerences between
an intervention and a control group, the use of a Student t-test is justified despite the data
being described as not normally distributed. With 40 participants in each group, the
sample size is large enough for the central limit theorem to support the use of parametric
testing, because the distribution of sample means tends to approximate normality even
when the raw data do not. The t-test is also highly robust when sample sizes are equal and
variances between groups are similar, making it an acceptable statistical approach for
comparing mean adherence levels. Therefore, given the study design, sample size, and
type of data collected, the t-test appropriately supports the analysis of mean diFerences
between the two groups.
2. Expected Indicators of Statistical Significance
For this research to be considered statistically significant, I would expect the Student t-test
to produce a p value less than .05, indicating that the observed diFerence in adherence is
unlikely to have occurred by chance. Additionally, a 95% confidence interval for the mean
diFerence that does not cross zero would strengthen the interpretation of significance by
confirming that the intervention had a measurable eFect compared to the control. A
meaningful eFect size—such as a moderate Cohen’s d—would also be important, because
it provides evidence that the diFerence is not only statistically significant but also clinically
relevant. Together, these statistical indicators help validate that the intervention had a real
and practical impact on medication adherence.
3. Impact of the Findings on Practice Change
The decision to use these findings to inform practice change would depend on both the
statistical significance and the clinical significance of the results. If the intervention leads
to a meaningful improvement in medication adherence and the study demonstrates
methodological rigor—such as proper randomization, valid measurement tools, and
feasible implementation—then this evidence would support adopting or piloting the
intervention in clinical practice. Improved adherence among patients with Type II diabetes
is highly relevant, as poor adherence is directly linked to long-term complications and
increased healthcare costs. However, if the eFect size is minimal or the intervention is not
feasible within the clinical setting, additional studies would be necessary before making
changes to practice. Overall, statistically and clinically significant findings would
encourage the integration of this intervention as part of evidence-based diabetes
management to enhance patient outcomes.
•
INSTRUCTIONS BELOW-
Application of Knowledge
2. Engagement in Meaningful Dialogue
a. Respond by furthering dialogue by providing more information and clarification, thereby
adding more depth to the discussion
A scholarly source is (a) evidence-based, (b) peer-reviewed, and (c) published in the last
five (5) years.
Incorporate three (3) diFerent sources each week: two (2) of the three (3) should be
scholarly.
Professionalism in Communication
a. References are consistent with APA style/formatting with no error patterns; the hanging
indent is not required.
b. Presents information in an organized manner.
c. Uses clear and concise language.
d. Communicates with no error patterns in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and
punctuation.
Writing Requirements (APA style/formatting)
· In-text citations
· Reference list in correct APA style/formatting
· Standard English usage and mechanics
· A scholarly source is (a) evidence-based, (b) peer-reviewed, and (c) published in the last
five (5) years.
· Response post(s) may require a scholarly citation and reference.
