Philostics [Surveys]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2009-12-27 14:28 (6009 d 13:02 ago) – Posting: # 4525
Views: 16,312

Dear HS,

❝ Not quite. The assumptions in the parametric model of any given metric are independent from each other, :blahblah:

❝ Untransformed metrics have limits of [-∞, +∞], whilst log-transformed have limits of [0, +∞], but in both cases the probability equals 1 (in other words, for Cmin and Cmax the log-transformation lead to the same lower limit – I wouldn’t call it a constraint – namely zero).


Hmmmm, this I would express differently. Cmax etc varies from 0 and upwards whilst the transformed (log) Cmax etc is from -inf to +inf. Log transformed parameters (C, AUC) go from -inf to +inf.

I meant something else though: Let's for simplicity consider the subject with the highest Cmax in the dataset (log or not is not the important issue here). Now we do a parametric analysis of (log) Cmin and we consider the (log) Cmin residual e for the same subject and we disregard other factors for now (makes no difference but makes it less easy to grasp). We know something about e; the (log) Cmax is higher than average (log) Cmin so average (log) Cmin plus e will be lower than (log) Cmax for that subject.

❝ ❝ (I shall abstain from proposing parametric statistics as a potential alternative, notch notch wink wink!)


:lol3: You mean nonparametric statistics? Well, cough…


Yes, I meant nonparametric. Sorry about the meaning-disturbing typo.
EM.

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,653 posts in 4,991 threads, 1,570 registered users;
124 visitors (0 registered, 124 guests [including 36 identified bots]).
Forum time: 04:30 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

There are no dangerous thoughts;
thinking itself is dangerous.    Hannah Arendt

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5