DNP 830 Topic 5 DQ 1: Statistical Analysis Plan
Naming a test is the easy part. Justifying it from your design, your measurement level and your sample is the part that separates answers.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 16, 2026
Alignment is the word being graded
Answer in the order the prompt gives, because each part constrains the next. Descriptive analysis comes first and is not a formality: it establishes who was in the sample, characterises the baseline, and shows whether the data meet the assumptions the inferential test depends on. Say which descriptives you will report and why — frequencies and percentages for categorical variables, means and standard deviations for normally distributed continuous ones, medians and interquartile ranges when they are skewed. That last choice is itself a finding about your data, and reporting a mean for a badly skewed variable is one of the commonest errors in these projects. Say which variables are categorical and which are continuous before naming any statistic, because that single classification decides most of what follows. Then state the sample size you expect, since it constrains the test as tightly as the design does and a doctoral project rarely has the numbers to ignore it.
Then the inferential test, justified from three things rather than named. The design decides the family: a single group measured before and after needs a paired test, two independent groups need an independent-samples test, and repeated measures across three or more points need a repeated-measures approach. The measurement level decides the variant, since a continuous outcome and a proportion do not take the same test. The sample size and distribution decide whether a parametric test is defensible or a non-parametric equivalent is safer, and a doctoral project sample is often small enough that this matters. Say all three and the alignment question is answered. Then close on the clinical question: a significant p-value says the result is unlikely under the null, not that the change was large enough to matter. Report an effect size or a mean difference in the outcome's own units. Say which you would report first in a manuscript, since ordering signals what you think the finding is.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Select descriptive statistics appropriate to each variable's distribution.
- 02Justify an inferential test from design, measurement level and sample.
- 03Distinguish statistical significance from clinical significance.
- 04Report effect in units a clinician can interpret.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01Descriptive statistics specified per variable type.
- 02A named inferential test.
- 03Justification from design, measurement level and sample.
- 04A statement of assumptions and what happens if they fail.
- 05An effect size or difference in the outcome's own units.
Descriptive, inferential, alignment, then the clinical question
Descriptive analysis and why it comes first
Establish sample characterisation and assumption checking.
Matching statistics to variable type
Choose measures appropriate to distribution and level.
The design decides the test family
Derive the inferential approach from the project design.
Assumptions and fallbacks
State what the test assumes and what to do when it fails.
Answering the clinical question
Report effect in interpretable units.
Statistical sources, not a textbook chapter
Recommended databases
- NCBI Bookshelf
- PubMed Central
- Your project methodology chapter
- CINAHL
Search sequence
- 1.Write out your design and measurement levels before choosing any test.
- 2.Read a statistics reference on the assumptions of your candidate test.
- 3.Find a published project with the same design and see what it used.
- 4.Look up how effect size is reported for your outcome type.
Reference shortlist
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.
- 01
Hypothesis Testing, P Values, Confidence Intervals, and Significance
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023
Hypothesis testing set out step by step, with the p-value's actual meaning stated.
- 02
Statistical Significance
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023
Statistical significance and what it does and does not license.
- 03
Human Subjects Research Design
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023
Human subjects research design — the categories the design questions turn on.
- 04
Explanation and elaboration of the SQUIRE (Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence) Guidelines, V.2.0: examples of SQUIRE elements
BMJ Quality & Safety · 2016
The SQUIRE guidelines with their own explanation — the reporting standard the project is being aligned to.
- 05
Continuous Quality Improvement
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023
Improvement methodology, which is what the analysis has to serve rather than lead.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Naming a test with no justification from the design.
- Reporting means for skewed data.
- Treating a p-value as a measure of importance.
- Ignoring sample size when choosing between parametric and non-parametric tests.
Submission checklist
- Have you specified descriptives for each variable type?
- Is your test justified from design, level and sample?
- Have you stated the assumptions and the fallback?
- Is there an effect measure in clinical units?
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.

Written by
Aaron Bishop
MA, Education
assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines
Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.

Reviewed by
Dr. Nathan Cole
PhD, Rhetoric & Composition
Argumentation and thesis development
Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.