Infant Mortality Rate for Twins: AMA Report 1996

[Shay10825]

Hi . I really need help with this problem.
Results of a 1996 American Medical Association report about the infant mortality rate for twins carried for the full term of a normal pregnancy are shown below, broken down by the level of prenatal care the mother had received.

http://img98.exs.cx/img98/836/untitled138.jpg

A. Should the overall rate be the average of the other 3 rates?
My answer - Yes

B. Do these results indicate that adequate prenatal care is important for pregnant women?
My answer- No

C. Do these results suggest that a women pregnant with twins should be wary of seeking too much medical care?
My Answer- Yes

Is this correct?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Parth Dave]

What is the reasoning behind your answers? I have some thoughts; but they aren't the same as yours. Maybe I am wrong, so its best to hear what you have to say before i start.

 

[Shay10825]

I could be wrong too because I'm really unsure about this.

A. I just said yes. I really don't know.
B. No because many infants still died with adequate care.
C. Yes because baout just as many died with intensive care than with adequate.

 

[Parth Dave]

Well here's the way i see it:
A. Overall suggests to me that they want the mortality rate itself. Which would be the sum of the three as opposed to the average. For example, suppose the mortality rate in a group of people was 2, and the mortality rate in another group was 4. What would be the overall mortality rate in the two groups? 6.

B. Well i would have to say Yes to this question. Because adequate prenatal care caused the least mortality rate. Over or under doing it causes more death. Yes, many infants did still die. But the least number of infants died.

C. I agree with you here.