Naïve distribution [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2013-05-06 11:02 (4788 d 05:20 ago) – Posting: # 10543
Views: 4,734

Dear Helmut,

❝ P.S.: Any idea why I get unequal variances of T and R in ~28% of studies? I expect only ~5%…


IMHO you are simulating the untransformed metrics (whatever it may be named: Cmax, AUC, ...) if you use rlnorm().
Thus change to:


# log-transformed data are normal distributed
T <- c(T, rnorm(group1, mean=log(GMR), sd=CV2se(CV1))
R <- c(R, rnorm(group2, mean=0, sd=CV2se(CV1))


and all is right with the world :cool::

Expected GMR: 0.95 – total CV 50 %.
Total sample size for = 80 % power: 194
Average study size: 196 ( 195 – 198 )
In 80.4 % of 10000 simulated studies BE was demonstrated.
Note: Unequal variances of T and R (F-test p <0.05) in 5.12 % of studies.

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,654 posts in 4,992 threads, 1,570 registered users;
98 visitors (0 registered, 98 guests [including 16 identified bots]).
Forum time: 16:22 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The idea is to try and give all the information to help others
to judge the value of your contribution;
not just the information that leads to judgment
in one particular direction or another.    Richard Feynman

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