Drug Controlled Substance Hypothesis Statistical
Please remember to address the following topics: scope, Terminology, Testing Facility, Personnel, QA Manual Documentation, Evidence Control, Chemical Reagents, Presumptive testing and confirmatory analytical Procedures, Validation, Equipment Maintenance and Calibration, Proficiency Testing, Audits, Deficiency of Analysis/Corrective Actions, and Health and Safety.
Depending upon the analysis being performed, some items may not be applicable whereas other components may need to be added. Also, remember that you can reference a number of standard procedures (SOPs) by referring to established SOPs – you do not need to provide the specifics of the analysis but rather just an overview of the best practice to analyze the sample – which includes optimization of available resources such as analytical instruments and personnel. (20 points)
The following FBI quality assurance guidelines summarize the essential goals and are helpful as a reference for this module as well as for the assignment:
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/jan2005/standards/2005standards15.htm (Links to an external site.)
Project Scenario: Two individual laboratories (Lab A and Lab B) were contracted to analyze 25 blood samples to determine the concentration of cocaine (and/or any metabolites) in each sample. Both labs used instrumentation that provided quantitative results, but each lab used a different method. Lab A utilized liquid chromatography- mass spectrometry (LCMS) and Lab B utilized gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GCMS). For this project, each laboratory was tasked with analyzing the blood samples of 25 known cocaine users. As this project involved the comparison of Lab A with Lab B’s final results, each lab needed to analyze the same 25 samples. As these labs were located in different cities, two tubes of blood were drawn from each of the 25 subjects. One blood tube was sent to Lab A and the second was sent to Lab B so that each lab would have the same 25 samples to compare. Now that the testing has been completed, a final report needs to be created to address whether or not the results from the two laboratories are equivalent.
For this assignment, you will need to write a brief outline for this project’s final report. This report should follow a clear structure and include all of the required components as described in the module’s reading. Be sure that the report you submit includes information on the two labs, the two different methods used, and 25 fictitious concentration results per lab. Additionally, be certain to include and explain all of the components that would be required for this final report as discussed in the reading. The concentration data must be included and a statistical analysis of that data must be included as a part of this report.
Please consider the following when completing this assignment:
* What does your fictional cocaine concentration data look like? You need to come up with your own fictional data for this assignment (the values for the concentrations should be in units of ng/mL). You must include the 25 concentration results for each lab as a part of the data as well as the results of the calculated statistics. You can simply present this concentration data in an Excel table or chart format
* The statistical comparison needs to be calculated using either a student t-test or Wilcoxon. You must perform the statistical analysis on your fictional data and compare Lab A to Lab B. You must also provide a conclusion as to whether or not the two methods were comparable.
Cocaine analysis in various body fluids:
Research report guidelines:
You may also have to refresh some knowledge of statistical testing since you will be comparing two groups. Here is some reading material:
“An Introduction to Statistics”, Driscoll P, Lecky F, Crosby M, J Accid Emerg Med, 2001, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1725369/ (Links to an external site.)
“An Introduction to hypothesis testing. Parametric comparison of two groups-1”, Driscoll P, Lecky F, Emerg Med J, 2001, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1725552/ (Links to an external site.)
“An Introduction to hypothesis testing. Parametric comparison of two groups-2”, Driscoll P, Lecky F, Emerg Med J, 2001, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1725593/ (Links to an external site.)
“An Introduction to hypothesis testing. Non-Parametric comparison of two groups-1”, Driscoll P, Lecky F, Emerg Med J, 2001, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1725625/