Download Sample Student Research Paper-1

The Correlation Between Gross Domestic Product and
Reported Cases of Malaria in India (1999-2011)
Abstract: Malaria is a life-threatening disease that affects millions worldwide due to parasiteinfected mosquitoes. Following the bite, the parasite can infect its new host by attacking the
excretory system. Malaria morbidity and mortality commonly affect and effect many parts of
Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia. Due to the high numbers it affects, malaria has
become a major public health issue since its discovery in 1880. One of the many countries where
malaria has become a major burden is India - whose malaria rate has contributed significantly to
the worldwide problem. In this study, the relationship between number of reported cases of
malaria and gross domestic product (GDP) of India are examined closely, resulting in a
noticeable correlation factor of 0.4533. Further examination of India's malaria rate and GDP are
also done by comparing it to the United States, Indonesia and Canada.
Introduction: Malaria has had a rich history since its inception in 2700 BCE in China and later
widely found in ancient Greek literature. Upon a discoveries by Charles Louis Alphonse
Laveran and Ronald Ross, the parasite causing malaria and that these parasites could be
transmitted by mosquitoes respectively, the uphill battle towards a cure began. 1 Malaria can
occur after being bitten by an infected female mosquito. Infected protists from the mosquito's
saliva travel into the new host's circulatory system, ultimately ending up in the human liver,
where further maturation and reproduction occurs. Common symptoms include fever, headache,
nausea, myalgia and diarrhea. If not treated, these symptoms can lead to death.2 Statistics have
shown that 80% of malaria cases are concentrated in seventeen countries, as illustrated by Figure
1.
1
Figure 1: A global illustration of the concentration of cases amongst seventeen countries affected by
malaria.
Because malaria has become a common public health concern for countries within Africa, the
Middle East and Southeast Asia, there has been a growing initiative to control and eradicate the
disease. Organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) have made malaria
prevention and control key global topics. In India, the highest incidence of malaria occurred in
the 1950s, with approximately 75 million cases reported within a span of a decade. Since then,
there has been a steady decline with the exception of a resurgence in 1965. 4 As of data collected
from WHO from 2011, the number of cases reported is currently fixed around one million, with a
current risk status of "moderate".2 Since 1999, India's annual GDP has positively increased from
$1,800 (PPP - per capita, US$) to $3,700 in 2011.5 The decline of malaria cases in India can
possibly be attributed to the increase in the country's increase in GDP. Similar studies have also
been done by Gallup and Sachs in "The Economic Burden of Malaria" as well as a group of
public health experts in "Malaria in India: The Center for the Study of Complex Malaria in
India".3,4 This specific study aims to examine these two factors in India and their correlation
with each other, as well as its overall relationship with other countries. Thus, India's annual
malaria rate and GDP are compared with the United States'. However, because these two
countries have such contrasting statistics - the United States has an annual GDP three times that
of India and an almost non-existent malaria risk status - two other countries are brought into
consideration for the purpose of running a valid t-test. For this purpose, a country with a similar
malaria relative frequency as India was chosen and a country with similar annual GDP as the
2
United States was chosen. With these new parameters, Indonesia and Canada were chosen.
Thus, for reported cases of malaria, the following was hypothesized:


H0: The reported malaria rate for Indonesia and India is the same.
H1: The reported malaria rate for Indonesia and India is different.
And for annual GDP, the following was hypothesized:
 H0: The GDP for Canada and the United States is the same.
 H1: The GDP for Canada and the United States is different.
Methodology:
Correlation
To further examine the relationship between India's GDP and malaria rate, the following data
was obtained and generated:
Year
1999
2000
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
India GDP
(PPP - per
capita, US$)
1800
2200
2540
2900
3100
3400
3800
2600
2900
3200
3500
3700
India Malaria (#
of reported cases) Total Population Relative Frequency Percentage
2280000
2030000
1840000
1870000
1920000
1850000
1785109
1508927
1532497
1563574
1599986
1310367
997515000
1029991000
1045845000
1049700000
1065071000
1080264000
1095352000
1129866000
1147996000
1166079000
1173108000
1189173000
0.00228568
0.001970891
0.001759343
0.001781461
0.001802697
0.001712544
0.001629713
0.001335492
0.001334932
0.001340882
0.001363886
0.001101915
0.228567991
0.197089101
0.175934292
0.178146137
0.180269672
0.171254434
0.162971264
0.1335492
0.133493235
0.134088171
0.136388636
0.110191452
Table 1: Data collected by the World Health Organization and Index Mundi from 1999-2011.
3
Figure 2: A scatter plot depicting the relationship between annual GDP and relative frequency of Malaria
in India from 1999-2011, with a correlation factor of 0.45333.
Analysis of Malaria Rate
To study the relationship between Indonesia and India's malaria rate, the following data was
obtained:
Year
Indonesia Malaria (# of
reported cases)
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
1150600
1149000
1142960
1085000
1067000
1052000
Total Population
245452700
234694000
237512400
240271500
242968300
245613000
Frequency
0.004687665
0.004895737
0.004812212
0.004515725
0.004391519
0.004283161
Percent
0.468766487
0.489573658
0.481221191
0.451572492
0.439151939
0.428316091
Table 2: Data collected by the World Health Organization from 2006-2011 for Indonesia.
4
India Malaria (# of
reported cases)
Year
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
1785109
1508927
1532497
1563574
1599986
1310367
Total Population
1095352000
1129866000
1147996000
1166079000
1173108000
1189173000
Frequency
0.001050439
0.001016935
0.000995613
0.000930469
0.00090955
0.000884648
Percent
0.105043858
0.101693475
0.099561323
0.093046869
0.090954967
0.088464841
Table 3: Data collected by the World Health Organization from 2006-2011 for India.
Malaria Frequency
Frequency of Reported Malaria Cases
0.006
y = -0.0001x + 0.2245
R² = 0.7205
0.005
0.004
0.003
Indonesia
0.002
y = -3E-05x + 0.0708
R² = 0.9758
India
0.001
0
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Year
Figure 3: A scatter plot depicting the decline in frequency of malaria in India and Indonesia from
2005-2011.
5
Using the data from Tables 2 and 3, a t-test was used to test the hypothesis at a 1% level of
significance.
t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Unequal Variances
Mean
Variable 1
1107760
Variable 2
1550076.667
2012723200
6
23475276263
6
Variance
Observations
Hypothesized Mean
Difference
df
t Stat
P(T<=t) one-tail
t Critical one-tail
P(T<=t) two-tail
t Critical two-tail
0
6
-6.786425012
0.000250381
1.943180274
0.000500761
2.446911846
Table 4: Results from a t-test assuming unequal variances, with variable 1 representing Indonesia and
variable 2 representing India.
Analysis of GDP
To study the relationship between the United States and Canada's GDP, the following data was
obtained:
Year
1999
2000
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Canada GDP - (PPP - per capita, US$)
23300
24800
29400
29800
31500
33900
35600
38600
39100
38100
39400
41100
Table 5: Data collected from Index Mundi for Canada from 1999-2011.
6
Year
1999
2000
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
US GDP (PPP - per capita, US$)
33900
36200
37600
37800
40100
41600
44000
45800
46900
46000
47200
49000
Table 6: Data collected from Index Mundi for the United States from 1999-2011.
Figure 4: A scatter plot depicting the increase in annual GDP for Canada and the United States from
1999-2011.
7
Using the data from Tables 5 and 6, a t-test was used to test the hypothesis at a 1% level of
significance.
t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Unequal Variances
Variable 1 Variable 2
Mean
Variance
Observations
Hypothesized Mean Difference
df
t Stat
P(T<=t) one-tail
t Critical one-tail
P(T<=t) two-tail
t Critical two-tail
33716.67
42175
35394242 24922045
12
12
0
21
-3.77275
0.000559
1.720743
0.001117
2.079614
Table 7: Data collected from Index Mundi for the United States from 1999-2011.
Results: As demonstrated in Figure 2, there is indeed a noticeable correlation between India's
annual GDP and number of reported malaria cases, with a r2 value of 0.4533. As suspected, as
the annual GDP increased, the reported malaria cases decreased, therefore confirming the
correlation between these two factors. Perhaps inclusion of more data over a longer period
would result in an even stronger correlation factor. Due to time constraints and a limited amount
of resources, a period of ten years is utilized.
Following the comparison of India's annual GDP and malaria rate, a t-test was conducted
separately for malaria rate (India and Indonesia) and annual GDP (United States and Canada).
As mentioned in the introduction, because of the drastic differences between India and the
United States, special measures were taken in order to obtain valid results. In order to run a t-test
for these two countries, the country chosen must either have a similar GDP or a similar malaria
rate. As a result, Indonesia was paired with India and United States was paired with Canada.
For the malaria rate, each country's annual malaria frequency was graphed (Figure 3) and found
to both demonstrate an annual decline. T-test results for both 1 and 2 tails at the 1% significance
level resulted in very small p-values of 0.000250380692606768 and 0.000500761385213536
respectively. Such small p-values lead to rejection of H0 and acceptance of H1. The malaria
rates for India and Indonesia are not the same, although both are considered to have "moderate"
malaria risks by WHO.
Similarly, a t-test was conducted for the annual GDP of the United States, which was paired with
Canada. The annual GDP for both countries were graphed (Figure 4) and found to both have
increasing annual GDPs. The t-test results in Table 7 for both 1 and 2 tails at the 1%
significance level resulted in very small p-values of 0.000558575917115377 and
8
0.00111715183423075 respectively. Like the malaria rate, the small p-values for annual GDP
lead to rejection of H0 and acceptance of H1. The annual GDPs for Canada and the United States
are not the same, although both are considered by Index Mundi to have similar economies.
Conclusion: The effects of malaria can lead to devastating levels of morbidity and mortality for
those countries that are affected. Due to organizations such as WHO, a higher emphasis is put
on education and immunization to prevent further outbreaks from occurring. Based on the
information compiled for this study, the correlation between India's GDP and malaria rate is
strong. Since 1999, India's economy (GDP) has steadily increased, leading to more money put
towards public healthcare. According to the most recent GDP statistics from India, the amount
spent on healthcare will rise from 1.4% to 2.5%. This bodes well for the communities that have
been heavily affected by malaria. More money spent on healthcare will lead to more
immunizations for young children (who are the most at risk for infection), insecticide-treated
nets and insecticide sprays. Compared to the United States (where malaria has become almost
non-existant), which spends approximately 7% of its GDP on healthcare, India is very far
behind.6 However, with more of the country's GDP spent on public health, positive steps are
being taken to ensure eradication of malaria.
_____________________________________________________________________________
1. http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/about/history
2. http://www.who.int/features/factfiles/malaria/en
3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK2624/
4. http://www.thereadgroup.net/wp-content/uploads/Das-et-al-India-ICEMR-2012.pdf
5. http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=in&v=67
6. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/healthcare-spend-to-rise-to-2.5--of-gdp/918380/
9