Welcome to jkanโs page.
Contributor score: 28
Comments ...
sunshinesweetheart
ugh, I feel like a child could misuse their insulin by accident without proper supervision. Totally thought she had T1DM and not enough guidance on how to use the meds. annoying
+3
peqmd
I couldn't rule out if the child was trying to get swole and had a shady dealer.
+3
alwaysdivs94
Sorry, where doesn't it talk about insulin abuse in the question? I thought she was administered for an acute exacerbation of heart failure?
+
jaramaiha
The issue was that the kid had 3 previous ED visits for similar symptoms in the past year. You'd think they would understand how their insulin works by then, so someone (her mom) is causing her to take too much insulin.
+
Subcomments ...
jkan
I get that it's not significant, but why is it 0.05<p<1 and not p>1.0
+12
jkan
nvm, it's can't be greater than 1 because then it would have a negative% confidence interval which cannot happen (Think if p>0.05 means at least 95% within confidence interval)
+12
charcot_bouchard
p=0.05 means theres 5% chance null hypothesis is true. p=1 means theres 100% chance null hypothesis is true. >1 means >100% chance which isnt possible.
+14
wowo
p is a probability, so can't be greater than 1
+11
noname
@charcot_bouchard, that is not a good interpretation of p-value.
A better interpretation of p=0.05 would be: If in reality there is no increase in risk (RR=1), and if we replicated the same study of the same sample size many different times, then we would expect to find a risk ratio of (X) only about 5% of the time.
+2
jkan
I get that it's not significant, but why is it 0.05<p<1 and not p>1.0
+12
jkan
nvm, it's can't be greater than 1 because then it would have a negative% confidence interval which cannot happen (Think if p>0.05 means at least 95% within confidence interval)
+12
charcot_bouchard
p=0.05 means theres 5% chance null hypothesis is true. p=1 means theres 100% chance null hypothesis is true. >1 means >100% chance which isnt possible.
+14
wowo
p is a probability, so can't be greater than 1
+11
noname
@charcot_bouchard, that is not a good interpretation of p-value.
A better interpretation of p=0.05 would be: If in reality there is no increase in risk (RR=1), and if we replicated the same study of the same sample size many different times, then we would expect to find a risk ratio of (X) only about 5% of the time.
+2
c-peptide is low with exogenous insulin. (c-peptide made as a byproduct of insulin production in the body) repeated visits+ high insulin+low c-peptide= exogenous insulin abuse. In a child-> factitious by proxy