Post hoc power #666 [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2014-03-14 14:31 (4488 d 07:52 ago) – Posting: # 12623
Views: 10,960

Hi Kumar,

❝ As we understand, in Nordic countries, […]



Only in Denmark.

As stated by ElMaestro – submit the study. I would suggest to remove “power” from the report for two reasons:
  1. Educational. Post hoc power is meaningless. Don’t submit nonsense.
  2. Your numbers are likely wrong. How did you derive them?
    Assuming a fully replicated design I got:
    • Cmax (reference-scaled) 95.33%, unscaled 87.95%
    • AUC0–t unscaled 99.94%
    If the design was a partial replicate, “power” would be lower.

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;
346 visitors (0 registered, 346 guests [including 22 identified bots]).
Forum time: 23:24 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Don’t compromise yourself.
You are all you’ve got.    Janis Joplin

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