Why not? [Power / Sample Size]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2013-05-03 19:09 (4797 d 11:43 ago) – Posting: # 10538
Views: 8,642

Hi John!

❝ How does one back calculate the intrasubject CV (and MSE?) from the 90% confidence interval obtained for a three way partial replicate study? Can it be done using the same suggestion that you presented in your previous slides?


Essentially yes. You have to get the degrees of freedom right. See Detlew’s post. For your log AUCt data and my CI (ignoring the fact that you had 16, 17, and 18 subjects in the three sequences) I got:

require(PowerTOST)
CVfromCI(lower=0.874898, upper=1.02586, n=51, design="2x3x3", alpha=0.05)
[1] 0.2850511

…or better?*

require(PowerTOST)
CVfromCI(lower=0.874898, upper=1.02586, n=51, design="2x3x3", alpha=0.05, robust=TRUE)
[1] 0.2820788

But: According to this discussion I duno whether the CI is correct. :confused:

Maybe it’s better to go with the linearized CI from the RSABE-code instead (no mixed-effects limbo). With the 90% CI of 0.874723 – 1.02766 I got:

require(PowerTOST)
CVfromCI(lower=0.874723, upper=1.02766, n=51, design="2x3x3", alpha=0.05)
[1] 0.2886897




P.S.: Any news from Donald Schuirmann? ;-)

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,572 registered users;
136 visitors (0 registered, 136 guests [including 28 identified bots]).
Forum time: 06:52 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Scientists cannot simply hang their subjectivities
up on a hook outside the laboratory door.    Ruth Bleier

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