SAS? YES; R? why not? as long as they are useful... [🇷 for BE/BA]

posted by yjlee168 Homepage – Kaohsiung, Taiwan, 2009-04-23 21:56 (5848 d 13:09 ago) – Posting: # 3598
Views: 68,103

Dear D. Labes,

❝ Ok, this is the code for a classical 2x2x2 cross-over, as I had stated above in my opening of this thread.


Yes, but just let you know that we used the SAS code to validate bear
when doing replicate data analysis. So... it is not appropriate to do so?

❝ Of course I could use both. But why?


As "the Power to know :ok:", everything should be easy for him to get to know it. We all can see and appreciate your sincere and long-term contributions to this Forum. :clap: So why not keep The Power to Know? And R? why not? You just use two or more statistical languages to speak BE/BA. That's why this Forum is so amazing and so interesting because of the members like you and many others.

❝ Why should an old lazy SAS dog take the extra effort in learning


No switch, please. Be a SAS old dog AND also a R new dog. Thank you so much.

All the best,
-- Yung-jin Lee
bear v2.9.2:- created by Hsin-ya Lee & Yung-jin Lee
Kaohsiung, Taiwan https://www.pkpd168.com/bear
Download link (updated) -> here

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,670 registered users;
85 visitors (0 registered, 85 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: 11:06 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

There are two possible outcomes: if the result confirms the
hypothesis, then you’ve made a measurement. If the result is
contrary to the hypothesis, then you’ve made a discovery.    Enrico Fermi

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