EquivTest v1 / v2 / PK [Software]
Dear HS
Thank you very much for your reply!
However, I am a little confused about followings.
You said the method of equivtest 2.0 is right in the former while it is wrong in the latter. Please clarify it.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Yu Chul Kim
Edit: Standard quotes restored. [Helmut]
Thank you very much for your reply!
However, I am a little confused about followings.
❝ In the case of an unbalanced study (n1 # n2) only the latter.
❝ In technical terms, the second one is wrong for unbalanced studies; the bias will depend on both the overall size of the study (n1+n2) and the degree of unbalance (ratio of n1/n2).
You said the method of equivtest 2.0 is right in the former while it is wrong in the latter. Please clarify it.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Yu Chul Kim
Edit: Standard quotes restored. [Helmut]
Complete thread:
- Mean calculation method in unbalanced cross-over study yckim 2008-05-27 15:04
- EquivTest v1 / v2 / PK Helmut 2008-05-27 15:41
- EquivTest v1 / v2 / PKyckim 2008-05-28 01:39
- Weighted mean Helmut 2008-05-28 11:55
- Least square mean d_labes 2008-05-28 16:35
- Least square mean yckim 2008-06-03 07:46
- Least square mean JPL 2008-06-03 09:10
- Least square mean vish14184 2008-06-04 06:54
- Least square mean JPL 2008-06-04 08:44
- Least square mean vish14184 2008-06-04 06:54
- Least square mean JPL 2008-06-03 09:10
- Least square mean yckim 2008-06-03 07:46
- Least square mean d_labes 2008-05-28 16:35
- Weighted mean Helmut 2008-05-28 11:55
- EquivTest v1 / v2 / PKyckim 2008-05-28 01:39
- EquivTest v1 / v2 / PK Helmut 2008-05-27 15:41