1.Mean and median are used as the primary measurement. Mode is seen in the first table and table 3
Appropriate measure of central tendency? Absolutely, the mean is clearly stated and many variations are introduced. Comparisons between years are used to show increases or decreases within the infant mortality rate.
2. How were measures of variation used in the study? Amongst the data collected several variations were introduced. These variations within cultures including Whites, Blacks, American Indians and so on. These variations allow us to view which, if any particular culture is experiencing a higher infant mortality rate. Which, in this case shows that blacks and non Hispanic blacks were experiencing a much higher rate of infant deaths in 2001 and 2002 respectively.
A second variation introduced on table 2 shows that multiple births are more likely to experience an infant death in contrast to a single child birth. In table 3 cause of death is used to make the determination. It appears that it is dependent on birth weight above or below a certain marker and whether “general” cause of death or congenital defects. Chromosomal abnormalities and deformations were a cause of death.
We can also conclude from the variations that are given that all races with the exception of Asians are above the standard mean. Also that abnormalities are a large portion of the total infant deaths compared to “normal”.
The conclusions that can be made are this. Blacks and non Hispanic blacks skew the distribution heavily. Asians are well below the mean by a fairly significant amount. We can also conclude American Indians had a significant drop in post neo natal mortality rate between 2001 and 2002. I also feel that the information provided was pretty much on point with the data collected. I also think that there was a fairly big jump in multiple births between 2001 and 2002. However the amount of deaths stay relatively the same.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document