(Daughter's homework, first year uni, context is not clear, just basic PDf/Cdf calculations.) An initial drug trial has known success p=0.4. ... there are some questions about this... then a final question: A new similar treatment is trialled on 200 people and has success p=0.475. In light of this information do you think the new programme could have a success ratio greater than 45%? Why?
I interpret this as a sharper question: What is the probability the new treatment actually has a success p>0.45 (90 out of 200 say)?
In my dopey head I read this as P("p>0.45"|D) where "D"="the data" = "95 out of 200 successes". So then is this not simply,
1-pbinom(90,200,0.475) = 0.7377192 ?
(using the R syntax so pbinom is the cumulative Cdf.)
My worry was this did not use the information that a likely Bayesian prior estimate for p was p=0.4, and why else would the question hint at the fact this is the "new programme" seemingly implying we do know about an older trial with p=0.4?
How (or could?) you get a better idea of whether p>0.45, or not, using Bayesian inference?
You don't give the level of your daughter's course or the context of this question within the course (e.g., recent topics studied). As stated, this does not seem to be a question in Bayesian inference.
The size of the initial trial that gave $p = .4$ is not given. It is possible that this is intended to be sort of a 'standard' against which results of the (presumably smaller) trial with $n = 200$ is to be tested.
If so, maybe you'd be testing $H_0: p = .45$ against $H_1: p > .45,$ using 95 Successes out of 200 subjects as data. (Admittedly, the choice of '0.45' seems arbitrary--here and in any other path of analysis.)
Another possibility would be to find a CI for $p$ based on 95 Successes in 200 and see whether it includes 0.45.
In any case, a sample of size $n = 200$ does not seem to be quite large enough o to make fine distinctions among $p = .4, .45, .475.$ The estimated standard error based on $\hat p = 0.475$ is $\sqrt{\hat p(1-\hat p)/200} \approx 0.16.$
The following output from Minitab statistical software does the one-sided hypothesis test I suggest above and gives the bound for the corresponding one-sided 95% confidence interval. (It uses exact binomial probabilities, not normal approximations--hence the word 'Exact'.)
A relevant computation in R statistical software is as follows: