Handling of dividing subject in two groups [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by beman – 2011-09-01 18:24 (5414 d 16:47 ago) – Posting: # 7319
Views: 4,822

Dear All,

in a 2x2-crossover BE-Study with 80 subject the subjects are divided in two groups with 40 Subject due to clinical capacity.

Treatment date of group 1: 1.9 (treatment 1) and 8.9 (treatment 2)
Treatment date of group 1: 4.9 (treatment 1) and 11.9 (treatment 2)

With is the most appropriate approach (from statistical and from guideline point of view):

a)
usual 2x2-ANOVA model with Terms SUBJECT PERIOD FORM with 2 Periods
(treatment 1 --> period 1, treatment 2 --> period 2)

proc GLM data=work.dummi;
   class SUBJECT PERIOD FORM;
   model LogAUCT LogCmax = SUBJECT PERIOD FORM/ SS3;
   lsmeans FORM / pdiff CL alpha=0.10;


b)
usual 2x2-ANOVA model (see code above) with Terms SUBJECT PERIOD FORM with 4 Periods
(treatment 1, group 1 --> period 1, treatment 1, group 2 --> period 2, treatment 2, group 1 --> period 3, treatment 2, group 2 --> period 4)

c)
including a TERM 'GROUP' in the ANOVA-Model. And which is the best way ? 2 stage design way without alpha-adjustment ?

d)
way proposed form a non-statistican (of our sponsor)

proc GLM data=work.dummi;
   class SUBJECT GROUP PERIOD FORM;
   model LogAUCT LogCmax = SUBJECT GROUP PERIOD FORM/ SS3;
   lsmeans FORM / pdiff CL alpha=0.10;


approach does not work ;-) because of zero degrees of freedom for the factor group ;-)

Best regards and thank you in advance

BEman

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,570 registered users;
305 visitors (0 registered, 305 guests [including 18 identified bots]).
Forum time: 11:11 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Most scientists today are devoid of ideas, full of fear, intent on
producing some paltry result so that they can add to the flood
of inane papers that now constitutes “scientific progress”
in many areas.    Paul Feyerabend

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