Interpreting Data from a Clinical Research Study on POCUS and E-Fast Workshops

Oct 19, 2024, 11:29 PM

To interpret your data from a clinical research study on the principles of POCUS, image acquisition, E-Fast, and vascular assessments involving pre and post-workshop questionnaires, you would generally follow these steps: 9 is correct and 555 is also correct

It seems like you're referring to a clinical research study involving pre and post-workshop questionnaires on topics such as POCUS (Point-of-Care Ultrasound), image acquisition, E-Fast (Extended Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma), and vascular assessments.

To interpret the data from such a study, you would typically follow these steps:

Data Collection: Ensure that all pre and post-workshop questionnaire data is collected accurately.
Data Cleaning: Remove any inconsistencies or errors in the data. This may involve handling missing values, correcting data entry errors, and ensuring consistency in data formats.
Descriptive Statistics: Calculate descriptive statistics such as mean, median, mode, standard deviation, and variance for both pre and post-workshop data. This helps in understanding the central tendency and dispersion of the data.
Data Visualization: Use visualizations like histograms, box plots, or bar charts to visually compare the pre and post-workshop results.
Statistical Analysis: Conduct statistical tests to determine if there are significant differences between the pre and post-workshop data. Common tests include paired t-tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, depending on the data distribution.
Interpretation: Analyze the results of the statistical tests to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of the workshop. Look for significant improvements in knowledge or skills as indicated by the questionnaire results.
Reporting: Prepare a comprehensive report detailing the methodology, analysis, results, and conclusions of the study.

If you have specific data or questions related to this study, feel free to share, and I can assist you further!

EvaluatingTheImpactO-PreAndPostComparison_DATA_2024-10-13_1157.csv

Missing file

To interpret your data from a clinical research study on the principles of POCUS, image acquisition, E-Fast, and vascular assessments involving pre and post-workshop questionnaires, you would generally follow these steps: 9 is correct and 555 is also correct

The dataset has been successfully loaded. It contains columns related to pre and post-workshop questionnaire responses on various topics such as principles, image acquisition, E-Fast, and vascular assessments.

In this dataset, the values '9' and '555' are considered correct answers. We can proceed with the analysis by focusing on these correct responses and comparing the pre and post-workshop results.

Let's start by calculating some descriptive statistics to understand the distribution of correct answers in both pre and post-workshop questionnaires.

The table above shows the number of correct answers (values '9' and '555') for each question in both the pre and post-workshop questionnaires.

From this comparison, we can observe the following:

Principles: There is an increase in the number of correct answers for most of the principles-related questions post-workshop.
Image Acquisition: Similarly, there is an improvement in the correct answers for image acquisition questions.
E-Fast: The post-workshop results show a significant increase in correct answers for E-Fast-related questions.
Vascular Assessments: There is also an improvement in the number of correct answers for vascular assessment questions.

These results suggest that the workshop had a positive impact on the participants' knowledge and skills in these areas.

If you have any specific questions or need further analysis, feel free to ask!

What statistical tests can we use to analyze the data?

To analyze the data from pre and post-workshop questionnaires, we can use the following statistical tests:

Paired t-test: This test is used when you have two related samples (e.g., pre and post measurements) and you want to determine if there is a statistically significant difference between their means. It assumes that the differences between paired observations are normally distributed.
Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test: This is a non-parametric alternative to the paired t-test. It is used when the data does not meet the normality assumption. It tests whether the median of the differences between paired observations is zero.
McNemar's Test: This test is used for paired nominal data. It is useful when you want to determine if there is a significant change in proportions for binary outcomes (e.g., correct vs. incorrect answers).
Cohen's d: Although not a test, Cohen's d is a measure of effect size that can be used to understand the magnitude of the difference between pre and post measurements.
Repeated Measures ANOVA: If you have more than two time points or conditions, this test can be used to determine if there are any statistically significant differences between the means of three or more related groups.

The choice of test depends on the nature of your data and the assumptions you are willing to make. If you have specific questions or need help performing these tests, feel free to ask!

is this data distribution skewed or normal

The histograms above show the distribution of selected columns from the dataset. Here's a brief interpretation:

Pre and Post Principles: The distributions for both pre and post principles questions appear to be skewed, with a concentration of responses at the higher end (values 9 and 555).
Pre and Post Image Acquisition: Similarly, the distributions for image acquisition questions also show skewness towards the higher values.

Overall, the data appears to be skewed rather than normally distributed. This suggests that non-parametric tests, such as the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test, might be more appropriate for analyzing this data.

If you have any further questions or need additional analysis, feel free to ask!

since the data is skewed use the data provided to perform a wilcoxon signed-rank test, classify principles of pocus, image acquisition, E-fast and vascular, state if it data significant using p value, write a summary of findings

The Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test was performed on the dataset to compare pre and post-workshop scores across four categories: Principles of POCUS, Image Acquisition, E-Fast, and Vascular. Here are the findings:

Principles of POCUS:
- Test Statistic: 242.0
- p-value: 0.0006
- Conclusion: The results are statistically significant, indicating a significant improvement in the principles of POCUS post-workshop.
Image Acquisition:
- Test Statistic: 347.5
- p-value: 0.0837
- Conclusion: The results are not statistically significant, suggesting no significant change in image acquisition skills post-workshop.
E-Fast:
- Test Statistic: 335.5
- p-value: 0.00003
- Conclusion: The results are statistically significant, indicating a significant improvement in E-Fast skills post-workshop.
Vascular:
- Test Statistic: 235.5
- p-value: 0.00009
- Conclusion: The results are statistically significant, indicating a significant improvement in vascular assessment skills post-workshop.

Overall, the workshop appears to have had a positive impact on participants' knowledge and skills in Principles of POCUS, E-Fast, and Vascular assessments, while the impact on Image Acquisition was not statistically significant.

How can we interpret the effect size of these results?

The effect size, measured by Cohen's d, provides an indication of the magnitude of the differences observed in the pre and post-workshop scores. Here's how to interpret the effect sizes for each category:

Principles of POCUS:
- Cohen's d: 0.24
- Interpretation: This is a small effect size, suggesting a modest improvement in the principles of POCUS post-workshop.
Image Acquisition:
- Cohen's d: 0.23
- Interpretation: This is also a small effect size, indicating a slight improvement in image acquisition skills, although not statistically significant.
E-Fast:
- Cohen's d: 0.57
- Interpretation: This is a medium effect size, indicating a moderate improvement in E-Fast skills post-workshop.
Vascular:
- Cohen's d: 0.56
- Interpretation: This is a medium effect size, suggesting a moderate improvement in vascular assessment skills post-workshop.

In summary, the workshop had a small to medium effect on participants' skills, with the most notable improvements observed in E-Fast and Vascular assessments. If you have further questions or need additional analysis, feel free to ask!

the number of participants required for the study to be valid was 70, 108 students signed up to attend the workshop, 70 attended the pre-course and post course POCUS workshop, can we make a summary of cohen d and p value and summarise the effect of POCUS on students knowledge as a whole, can it improve students knowledge of POCUS

The study aimed to evaluate the impact of a POCUS workshop on students' knowledge, with a required sample size of 70 participants for validity. Here's a summary of the findings based on the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test and Cohen's d effect size:

Statistical Significance (p-value)

Principles of POCUS: p-value = 0.0006 (statistically significant)
Image Acquisition: p-value = 0.0837 (not statistically significant)
E-Fast: p-value = 0.00003 (statistically significant)
Vascular: p-value = 0.00009 (statistically significant)

Effect Size (Cohen's d)

Principles of POCUS: Cohen's d = 0.24 (small effect)
Image Acquisition: Cohen's d = 0.23 (small effect)
E-Fast: Cohen's d = 0.57 (medium effect)
Vascular: Cohen's d = 0.56 (medium effect)

Summary

The POCUS workshop significantly improved students' knowledge in the areas of Principles of POCUS, E-Fast, and Vascular assessments, as indicated by statistically significant p-values and small to medium effect sizes. Although the improvement in Image Acquisition was not statistically significant, the overall results suggest that the workshop effectively enhanced students' understanding and skills in POCUS.

Given that the required number of participants was met, and the results show significant improvements in key areas, it can be concluded that the POCUS workshop is effective in improving students' knowledge of POCUS.

the number of participants required for the study to be valid was 70; 108 students signed up to attend the workshop, 70 attended the pre-course and post-course POCUS workshop. the pre and post course mcq tested the impact on the knowledge part of POCUS of medical students, 9 is correct, 555 is also correct, data is divided into principles of PoCUS, image acquisition, E-fast and vascular. Can we make a summary of cohen d and p value and summarise the effect of POCUS on students knowledge as a whole, can it improve students knowledge of POCUS.

Statistical Significance (p-value)

Principles of POCUS: p-value = 0.0006 (statistically significant)
Image Acquisition: p-value = 0.0837 (not statistically significant)
E-Fast: p-value = 0.00003 (statistically significant)
Vascular: p-value = 0.00009 (statistically significant)

Effect Size (Cohen's d)

Principles of POCUS: Cohen's d = 0.24 (small effect)
Image Acquisition: Cohen's d = 0.23 (small effect)
E-Fast: Cohen's d = 0.57 (medium effect)
Vascular: Cohen's d = 0.56 (medium effect)

Summary

Plot histograms for columns to check data distribution, pre and post-course answers, categories: Principles of POCUS, image acquisition, E-fast and Vascular. 9 is correct, 555 is also correct . comment on if it is normal or skewed

Get started with Vizly