In 2004, the state of North Carolina released a large data set containing information on births recorded in this state. This data set is useful to researchers studying the relation between habits and practices of expectant mothers and the birth of their children. We will work with a random sample of observations from this data set.
Load the nc
data set into our workspace.
load("more/nc.RData")
We have observations on 13 different variables, some categorical and some numerical. The meaning of each variable is as follows.
variable | description |
---|---|
fage |
father’s age in years. |
mage |
mother’s age in years. |
mature |
maturity status of mother. |
weeks |
length of pregnancy in weeks. |
premie |
whether the birth was classified as premature (premie) or full-term. |
visits |
number of hospital visits during pregnancy. |
marital |
whether mother is married or not married at birth. |
gained |
weight gained by mother during pregnancy in pounds. |
weight |
weight of the baby at birth in pounds. |
lowbirthweight |
whether baby was classified as low birthweight (low ) or not (not low ). |
gender |
gender of the baby, female or male . |
habit |
status of the mother as a nonsmoker or a smoker . |
whitemom |
whether mom is white or not white . |
The cases are the babies born in NC in 2004. There are 1000 observations in this sample.
str(nc)
## 'data.frame': 1000 obs. of 13 variables:
## $ fage : int NA NA 19 21 NA NA 18 17 NA 20 ...
## $ mage : int 13 14 15 15 15 15 15 15 16 16 ...
## $ mature : Factor w/ 2 levels "mature mom","younger mom": 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ...
## $ weeks : int 39 42 37 41 39 38 37 35 38 37 ...
## $ premie : Factor w/ 2 levels "full term","premie": 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 ...
## $ visits : int 10 15 11 6 9 19 12 5 9 13 ...
## $ marital : Factor w/ 2 levels "married","not married": 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
## $ gained : int 38 20 38 34 27 22 76 15 NA 52 ...
## $ weight : num 7.63 7.88 6.63 8 6.38 5.38 8.44 4.69 8.81 6.94 ...
## $ lowbirthweight: Factor w/ 2 levels "low","not low": 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 ...
## $ gender : Factor w/ 2 levels "female","male": 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 ...
## $ habit : Factor w/ 2 levels "nonsmoker","smoker": 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
## $ whitemom : Factor w/ 2 levels "not white","white": 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 ...
As a first step in the analysis, we should consider summaries of the data. This can be done using the summary
command:
summary(nc)
## fage mage mature weeks
## Min. :14.00 Min. :13 mature mom :133 Min. :20.00
## 1st Qu.:25.00 1st Qu.:22 younger mom:867 1st Qu.:37.00
## Median :30.00 Median :27 Median :39.00
## Mean :30.26 Mean :27 Mean :38.33
## 3rd Qu.:35.00 3rd Qu.:32 3rd Qu.:40.00
## Max. :55.00 Max. :50 Max. :45.00
## NA's :171 NA's :2
## premie visits marital gained
## full term:846 Min. : 0.0 married :386 Min. : 0.00
## premie :152 1st Qu.:10.0 not married:613 1st Qu.:20.00
## NA's : 2 Median :12.0 NA's : 1 Median :30.00
## Mean :12.1 Mean :30.33
## 3rd Qu.:15.0 3rd Qu.:38.00
## Max. :30.0 Max. :85.00
## NA's :9 NA's :27
## weight lowbirthweight gender habit
## Min. : 1.000 low :111 female:503 nonsmoker:873
## 1st Qu.: 6.380 not low:889 male :497 smoker :126
## Median : 7.310 NA's : 1
## Mean : 7.101
## 3rd Qu.: 8.060
## Max. :11.750
##
## whitemom
## not white:284
## white :714
## NA's : 2
##
##
##
##
As you review the variable summaries, consider which variables are categorical and which are numerical. For numerical variables, are there outliers? If you aren’t sure or want to take a closer look at the data, make a graph.
Consider the possible relationship between a mother’s smoking habit and the weight of her baby. Plotting the data is a useful first step because it helps us quickly visualize trends, identify strong associations, and develop research questions.
habit
and weight
. What does the plot highlight about the relationship between these two variables?boxplot(nc$weight ~ nc$habit)
The box plots show how the medians of the two distributions compare, but we can also compare the means of the distributions using the following function to split the weight
variable into the habit
groups, then take the mean of each using the mean
function.
by(nc$weight, nc$habit, mean)
## nc$habit: nonsmoker
## [1] 7.144273
## --------------------------------------------------------
## nc$habit: smoker
## [1] 6.82873
There is an observed difference, but is this difference statistically significant? In order to answer this question we will conduct a hypothesis test.
by
command above but replacing mean
with length
.by(nc$weight, nc$habit, length)
## nc$habit: nonsmoker
## [1] 873
## --------------------------------------------------------
## nc$habit: smoker
## [1] 126
par(mfrow=c(1,2))
hist(nc$weight[nc$habit == "smoker"], main = "Weight for Smoking Mothers", xlab = "Weight")
hist(nc$weight[nc$habit == "nonsmoker"], main = "Weight for Non-Smoking Mothers", xlab = "Weight")
To satisfy the conditions for inference,
This is a sample of all mothers and assuming they did not know each other, the sample of smoking/non-smoking are considered independent. The distribution shows near normal and despite the slight skenewss, as the sample size is > 30 which verifies the conditions for inference.
Next, we introduce a new function, inference
, that we will use for conducting hypothesis tests and constructing confidence intervals.
inference(y = nc$weight, x = nc$habit, est = "mean", type = "ht", null = 0,
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical")
## Response variable: numerical, Explanatory variable: categorical
## Difference between two means
## Summary statistics:
## n_nonsmoker = 873, mean_nonsmoker = 7.1443, sd_nonsmoker = 1.5187
## n_smoker = 126, mean_smoker = 6.8287, sd_smoker = 1.3862
## Observed difference between means (nonsmoker-smoker) = 0.3155
##
## H0: mu_nonsmoker - mu_smoker = 0
## HA: mu_nonsmoker - mu_smoker != 0
## Standard error = 0.134
## Test statistic: Z = 2.359
## p-value = 0.0184
Let’s pause for a moment to go through the arguments of this custom function. The first argument is y
, which is the response variable that we are interested in: nc$weight
. The second argument is the explanatory variable, x
, which is the variable that splits the data into two groups, smokers and non-smokers: nc$habit
. The third argument, est
, is the parameter we’re interested in: "mean"
(other options are "median"
, or "proportion"
.) Next we decide on the type
of inference we want: a hypothesis test ("ht"
) or a confidence interval ("ci"
). When performing a hypothesis test, we also need to supply the null
value, which in this case is 0
, since the null hypothesis sets the two population means equal to each other. The alternative
hypothesis can be "less"
, "greater"
, or "twosided"
. Lastly, the method
of inference can be "theoretical"
or "simulation"
based.
type
argument to "ci"
to construct and record a confidence interval for the difference between the weights of babies born to smoking and non-smoking mothers.inference(y = nc$weight, x = nc$habit, est = "mean", type = "ci", null = 0,
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical")
## Response variable: numerical, Explanatory variable: categorical
## Difference between two means
## Summary statistics:
## n_nonsmoker = 873, mean_nonsmoker = 7.1443, sd_nonsmoker = 1.5187
## n_smoker = 126, mean_smoker = 6.8287, sd_smoker = 1.3862
## Observed difference between means (nonsmoker-smoker) = 0.3155
##
## Standard error = 0.1338
## 95 % Confidence interval = ( 0.0534 , 0.5777 )
By default the function reports an interval for (\(\mu_{nonsmoker} - \mu_{smoker}\)) . We can easily change this order by using the order
argument:
inference(y = nc$weight, x = nc$habit, est = "mean", type = "ci", null = 0,
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical",
order = c("smoker","nonsmoker"))
## Response variable: numerical, Explanatory variable: categorical
## Difference between two means
## Summary statistics:
## n_smoker = 126, mean_smoker = 6.8287, sd_smoker = 1.3862
## n_nonsmoker = 873, mean_nonsmoker = 7.1443, sd_nonsmoker = 1.5187
## Observed difference between means (smoker-nonsmoker) = -0.3155
##
## Standard error = 0.1338
## 95 % Confidence interval = ( -0.5777 , -0.0534 )
weeks
) and interpret it in context. Note that since you’re doing inference on a single population parameter, there is no explanatory variable, so you can omit the x
variable from the function.inference(y = nc$weeks, est = "mean", type = "ci",
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical")
## Single mean
## Summary statistics:
## mean = 38.3347 ; sd = 2.9316 ; n = 998
## Standard error = 0.0928
## 95 % Confidence interval = ( 38.1528 , 38.5165 )
95% confident the avg length of pregnancy for the population in weeks is between 38.1528 ~ 38.5165 weeks.
conflevel = 0.90
.inference(y = nc$weeks, est = "mean", type = "ci", null = 0,
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical", conflevel=0.9)
## Single mean
## Summary statistics:
## mean = 38.3347 ; sd = 2.9316 ; n = 998
## Standard error = 0.0928
## 90 % Confidence interval = ( 38.182 , 38.4873 )
95% confidence the averagelength of pregnancy of the population is between 38.182 and 38.4873 weeks.
inference(y = nc$gained, x=nc$mature, est = "mean", type = "ht", null = 0,
alternative = "twosided", method = "theoretical")
## Response variable: numerical, Explanatory variable: categorical
## Difference between two means
## Summary statistics:
## n_mature mom = 129, mean_mature mom = 28.7907, sd_mature mom = 13.4824
## n_younger mom = 844, mean_younger mom = 30.5604, sd_younger mom = 14.3469
## Observed difference between means (mature mom-younger mom) = -1.7697
##
## H0: mu_mature mom - mu_younger mom = 0
## HA: mu_mature mom - mu_younger mom != 0
## Standard error = 1.286
## Test statistic: Z = -1.376
## p-value = 0.1686
With p-value of 0.1686, we do not reject the null hypothesis; There is no difference in weight gain between mature and young mothers.
library(data.table)
nc <- as.data.table(nc)
nc[, .(min.mage = min(mage),
max.mage = max(mage)), by = mature]
## mature min.mage max.mage
## 1: younger mom 13 34
## 2: mature mom 35 50
The age cut off for younger and mature mothers is between 34 and 35 (min, max age of each younger-mature mothers)
inference
function, report the statistical results, and also provide an explanation in plain language.To explore the relationship between lowbirthweight to babies and weight gains mothers got. Do mothers who gave birth with lowbirthweight to babies gained more weight during pregnancy?
Question: Is there difference between the mothers’ weight gain based on the birth weight on babies (low - not low)?
inference(y = nc$gained, x = nc$lowbirthweight, est = "mean", type = "ht", null = 0, alternative = "twosided",
method = "theoretical", order = c("not low", "low"))
## Response variable: numerical, Explanatory variable: categorical
## Difference between two means
## Summary statistics:
## n_not low = 869, mean_not low = 30.8343, sd_not low = 14.1444
## n_low = 104, mean_low = 26.0769, sd_low = 14.4065
## Observed difference between means (not low-low) = 4.7574
##
## H0: mu_not low - mu_low = 0
## HA: mu_not low - mu_low != 0
## Standard error = 1.492
## Test statistic: Z = 3.189
## p-value = 0.0014
Given the p-value 0.0014, we reject the null hypothesis. It appears that the mothers who gave birth to babies with low birth weight, gained less weight during pregnancy compare to the others who gave birth to babies with not-low birth weight.
This is a product of OpenIntro that is released under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported. This lab was adapted for OpenIntro by Mine Çetinkaya-Rundel from a lab written by the faculty and TAs of UCLA Statistics.