I need a long response will give brainliest. Malaria causes hundreds of thousands of deaths each year, with many of the victims being children. Will regularly screening children for the malaria parasite and treating those who test
positive reduce the proportion of children who develop the disease? Researchers worked with
children in 101 schools in Kenya, randomly assigning half of the schools to receive regular
screenings and follow-up treatments and the remaining schools to receive no regular screening.
Children at all 101 schools were tested for malaria at the end of the study.

1.Why was it necessary to include a group of schools that didn't receive the screening?
Does excluding some schools from screening raise any ethical concerns?

2. Describe how you could randomly assign the 101 schools into groups of 51 and 50.
3. What is the purpose of random assignments in this experiment?
4. If the researchers found convincing evidence that the proportion with malaria is lower for
the children in schools that are regularly screened, would it be reasonable to say that the
screening caused the reduction in malaria? Would these results apply to all schools in
Africa? Explain.
5. Unfortunately, the results of the study were not statistically significant. Explain what this
means in the context of this study.