dataset

[hardin47]

I thought this article could be fun data. I don't know how easy it is to get the data though, I can't even seem to get the article!

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/full/10.7326/M21-2977

Association of Sugar-Sweetened, Artificially Sweetened, and Unsweetened Coffee Consumption With All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality

It says that drinking coffee makes you live longer. All sorts of things to talk about!

[hardin47]

Another potential dataset / example:

https://jfiksel.github.io/2022-07-14-coffee_rest_time/

How long should you let coffee beans sit after they are roasted before they are ground.

[hardin47]

both examples are two-sample t-tests

[hardin47]

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/ebiom/article/PIIS2352-3964(23)00308-0/fulltext

whether it matters which arm COVID-19 shot went into. data is available.

[hardin47]

https://bmcnurs.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12912-023-01466-8

RCT on nurses. half received mindfulness training. self-compassion went up.

[hardin47]

A randomized clinical trial of exercise during
pregnancy to prevent gestational diabetes mellitus
and improve pregnancy outcome in overweight
and obese pregnant women

https://www.ajog.org/article/s0002-9378(17)30172-2/fulltext

Women randomized to the exercise group had a significantly lower incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus (22.0% vs 40.6%; P < .001). These women also had significantly less gestational weight gain by 25 gestational weeks (4.08 ± 3.02 vs 5.92 ± 2.58 kg; P < .001) and at the end of pregnancy (8.38 ± 3.65 vs 10.47 ± 3.33 kg; P < .001), and reduced insulin resistance levels (2.92 ± 1.27 vs 3.38 ± 2.00; P = .033) at 25 gestational weeks. Other secondary outcomes, including gestational weight gain between 25-36 gestational weeks (4.55 ± 2.06 vs 4.59 ± 2.31 kg; P = .9), insulin resistance levels at 36 gestational weeks (3.56 ± 1.89 vs 4.07 ± 2.33; P = .1), hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (17.0% vs 19.3%; odds ratio, 0.854; 95% confidence interval, 0.434–2.683; P = .6), cesarean delivery (except for scar uterus) (29.5% vs 32.5%; odds ratio, 0.869; 95% confidence interval, 0.494–1.529; P = .6), mean gestational age at birth (39.02 ± 1.29 vs 38.89 ± 1.37 weeks’ gestation; P = .5); preterm birth (2.7% vs 4.4%, odds ratio, 0.600; 95% confidence interval, 0.140–2.573; P = .5), macrosomia (defined as birthweight >4000 g) (6.3% vs 9.6%; odds ratio, 0.624; 95% confidence interval, 0.233–1.673; P = .3), and large-for-gestational-age infants (14.3% vs 22.8%; odds ratio, 0.564; 95% confidence interval, 0.284–1.121; P = .1) were also lower in the exercise group compared to the control group, but without significant difference. However, infants born to women following the exercise intervention had a significantly lower birthweight compared with those born to women allocated to the control group (3345.27 ± 397.07 vs 3457.46 ± 446.00 g; P = .049).

[hardin47]

we had a duplicate chapter 20 problem (see #266 ). i replaced the problem (nurses and mindfulness, see comment above in this issue). i had hopes of also replacing the two problems with respect to fuel efficiency. but i didn't find a perfect dataset (including the data so we could make boxplots). we have 20 problems in chapter 20 (which seems like plenty!), so we could just remove the fuel efficiency problems (because keeping them in makes me feel like the book is outdated). or we could just leave them in (because why take them out?).

@mine-cetinkaya-rundel let me know if you think we should remove the fuel efficiency problems. (there are both even, if you care). or if you have a perfect dataset to replace them.

[hardin47]

closed and tracked at #407