Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Standard error [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2010-08-19 18:18 (5779 d 12:03 ago) – Posting: # 5811
Views: 10,946

Dear Helmut, dear Bharat,

❝ Edit: I played around with your dataset. I coded the subjects ID to 1-9,

❝ 1-9, 10-16, 10-16. I don't have SAS, but in Phoenix/WinNonlin v6.1 I could

❝ confirm SAS's results, both for AUC_t and AUC_inf.

❝ Interestingly I got for SE_(T-R):

❝           PHX     'manual'

❝ AUCt    0.0381181 0.0378191

❝ AUCinf  0.0378947 0.0375974

❝ Can one of our SAS-owners please check these results?

Of course I will do you the favor.

          PHX     'manual' "The power to know"
AUCt    0.0381181 0.0378191  0.03811805
AUCinf  0.0378947 0.0375974  0.03789467

❝ Maybe my formula is wrong.

Seems so .
Try the following:
   SE(T-R)=sqrt(0.5*MSEresidual*(1/n1+1/n2))
AUCinf:  =sqrt(0.5*0.01130855*(1/9+1/7))= 0.03789467.

Bahrat! Have a look at ElMaestros first sentence! Eventually that is your problem.

BTW: My SAS LSMeans are equal to Bahrats SAS LSMeans . That is finest software validation! SAS gives the same results regardless if in India or in Germany! Also it seems to make no difference if Bahrat or D. Labes calculates. Also it is not known which release of "Superior software" they use. That is highly satisfactory .

Complete thread:

• least square mean calculation bvoggu 2010-08-18 07:49 
  • least square mean calculation Helmut 2010-08-18 14:15
    • least square mean calculation bvoggu 2010-08-19 09:24
      • SE: SAS / PHX-WNL / manual Helmut 2010-08-19 12:36
        • Standard errord_labes 2010-08-19 16:18
          • Standard error Helmut 2010-08-19 16:33
          • Standard error bvoggu 2010-08-20 10:51
            • Not with EXCEL d_labes 2010-08-20 14:57
  • least square mean calculation ElMaestro 2010-08-18 14:46
    • least square mean calculation bvoggu 2010-08-20 07:41
      • LSMeans ElMaestro 2010-08-20 09:34