3. Inclusion/Exclusion criteria: Cells’ data bank will be screened to determine the dynamic membrane properties for each cell group and to ensure they meting all inclusion and exclusion criteria. Cells will be excluded from the study if they fall under one of the following: (1) Unhealthy neural cells (2) neural cells that have different diameter or geometric shape (3) cells that don’t contain all the required parameters values, (4) Cancer cells (5) Uncomplete data set. 4. Sample size calculation: To determine the sample size needed for all groups, an a priori power analysis, conducted using G*Power 3.0.10 software, calculated the required sample size n = 30 per group bases on an ANOVA test that has 80% power to detect a significant …show more content…
Alternatively, it is possible that the statistical test find significant difference between trials, which is an indication of the in consistency of the algorithm. In this case we would revise out algorithm and experimental design, we also may increase the number of trials to re-examine the consistency of the algorithm. Also the statistical test may reveal no significant difference between groups, in this case we will re construct the groups based on manipulation of three parameters, and we will revisit the range of variation for each parameter. 2. Exp2: We predict a significant difference between groups, waveforms and the interaction between both of them, and the post hoc test will reveal that groups with variation in Gnamax, Gleak and α will be more selective than groups with them constant. This is an indication that Gnamax, Gleak and α can be used to improve stimulation selectivity. However, the test may show no significance between groups, in this case we will revise the parameters combinations. Also, We may run the statistical test relatively to the stimulus strength (K) instead of NOC. In this case we should revise the parameters variation range and confirm that all cells is stable when running the test. 3. EXp3: Results from experiment 2 will guide us
Action potentials can occur more frequently as long there is a continued source of stimulation, as long as the relative refractory period has been reached, which in experiment 2 the refractory period was complete.
A power analysis indicated the need for 40 subjects per group in order to provide 80% power so that it can well detect differences between the two groups. These differences were detected by using a
7. If a study had a result of F(2, 147) = 4.56, p = 0.003, how many groups were in the study, and what was the sample size?
In the study, the between-groups design and the cross-sectional design were used for research. There were 243 participants between the ages of 18 and 39, and the majority were females and Caucasians. The average age was about 21 years old.
3. Sample Population: Who exactly was used in the study? How many? (Be as specific as possible.)
similar test settings available in the literature [Daniels et al., 1995,Bano et al., 2009,Capozzoli et al., 2012].
What is the sample size? The sample size for this study was 233 patients and 148 nurses.
According to our percent error computations, the graphical method is more accurate than the experimental method. For instead, the percent difference between experimental to
From G*Power it explains, the sample size will be significant and good sample size. I used alpha .05 and .80 for power then I added my population size in the program (Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner, 2007). The sample size for this population in the health program has to be a good size and well rounded. I want to achieve good data and realistic sample size. The response rate I anticipate from this population is to be 70%. The reading level needs to be around .07-.08 for literature purposes and reliability for each participant in the health program (Faul, Erdfelder, Buchner, & Lang, 2009). To collect data for this survey I will use paper and pencils for the
Limitations to this study included the sample size. The study concluded after 18 months. This study resulted in a power of 48.9% based upon post study power analysis. A study with a population of 348, 174 in each group would be required for sufficient power. An additional limit is the inability to blind the study due to
PNS and the FST alone had no effect on the firing rate of LC NE neurons, however, a significantly PNS x FST interaction effect was detected (two-way ANOVA, F1,516=17.4, p0.05, data not
Based on the presented problem above, the hypothesis will be formulated and tested at 0.05 level of significance.
The method of selecting the sample was clearly defined and the sample size met the suggested guideline for minimum sample size. Data was
Therefore, based on this information appropriate original sample sizes were selected. On the negative side, even after pilot studies, questionnaires contained certain limitations, including lack of details about expected outcomes of the study, better structure of questions, etc.
The project aim at teenagers, therefore sample group is between 13 to 19. I will set the sample sizes in 50 participants since it is easy to identity and more precision. If a sample sizes increase, it is very hard to estimate and become not accurate. Also, I’m worry about the extremes data can’t make a balance out, so the project prefers small sample sizes. It can take less effort to gain and maintain people, it is easy to produce significant results and comfortable to find a group of people. I will obtain samples from friends or friends’ sister and brother.