PowerTOST [Power / Sample Size]

posted by Ben – Germany, 2012-01-02 18:39 (5275 d 14:24 ago) – Posting: # 7851
Views: 11,054

Dear D. Labes,

First, I want to say thanks for the great package PowerTOST!
I saw that you added some new features, in particular the df2 degrees of freedom. The latter brings me to my second point. In your excerpt (or the manual) you wrote "The df2 are also more appropriate if the planning of sample size is done based on CV’s originating from real mixed model analysis (via Proc MIXED in SAS or lme() in R)". Why is that? Is there a reference where this is mentioned (haven't seen it explicitly in Senn's "Cross-over Trials in Clinical Research")?

Thank you!

Best regards,
Ben

PS: Of course, everyone else can comment on this as well
PPS: Why don't you include balanced incomplete block designs (e.g. the 3x4x3 design mentioned in Chow and Liu's 'Design and Analysis of Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Studies') into PowerTOST?


Edit: Moved to this thread. [Helmut]

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,653 posts in 4,991 threads, 1,570 registered users;
108 visitors (0 registered, 108 guests [including 26 identified bots]).
Forum time: 10:03 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

To propose that poor design can be corrected by subtle analysis techniques
is contrary to good scientific thinking.    Stuart J. Pocock

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