Post hoc power #666 [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2014-03-14 14:31 (4474 d 11:07 ago) – Posting: # 12623
Views: 10,877

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
23,653 posts in 4,991 threads, 1,570 registered users;
149 visitors (0 registered, 149 guests [including 42 identified bots]).
Forum time: 02:38 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

I have never in my life learned anything
from any man who agreed with me.    Dudley Field Malone

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