For many years, the medically accepted practice of giving aid to a person experiencing a heart attack was to have the person who placed the emergency call administer chest compression (CC) plus standard mouth-to-mouth resuscitation (MMR) to the heart attack patient until the emergency response teams arrived. However, some researchers believed that CC alone would be a more effective approach.

In the 1990s a study was conducted in Seattle in which 518 cases were randomly assigned two treatments: 278 to CC plus standard MMR and 240 to CC alone. A total of 64 patients survived the heart attack, 29 in the group receiving CC plus standard MMR, and 35 in the group receiving CC alone. A test of significance was conducted on the following hypotheses.

H0: The survival rates for the two treatments are equal

Ha: The treatment that uses CC alone produces a higher survival rate

This test resulted in a p-value of 0.0761

Interpret what this p-value measures in the context of this study.

1. The probability that the treatment that uses CC alone produces a higher survival rate. 2. The probability that the survival rates for the two treatments are equal. 3. The probability that if the survival rate for the two treatments are equal, we will see a difference in the proportions equal to the sample or larger. 4. The probability of rejecting the null hypothesis. 5. The probability of failing to reject the null hypothesis.