Power in Diletti's sample size table [🇷 for BE/BA]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2007-01-02 00:59 (6687 d 06:37 ago) – Posting: # 428
Views: 46,779

(edited on 2007-06-04 12:41)

Dear all,

I performed some comparisons of the code based on Jones/Kenward implemented in R, Diletti's table and results obtained from StudySize (v2.0.1). Quite interesting...

All comparisons were done for CV=20% with ratios of 0.85–1.20. Dilleti reported sample sizes to obtain ≥80% power, calculated odd sample sizes were reported rounded up to the next even number (underlined):
+======+=====+===========+===========+
|  GMR |  n  |  R-code   | StudySize |
+------+-----+-----------+-----------+
| 0.85 | 134 | 0.8014178 |  0.80167  |
| 0.90 |  38 | 0.8140704 |  0.81536  |
| 0.95 |  20 | 0.8300156 |  0.83451  |
| 1.00 |  16 | 0.8214263 |  0.83305  |
| 1.05 |  18 | 0.79503430.79996  |
| 1.10 |  32 | 0.8084890 |  0.80992  |
| 1.15 |  72 | 0.8035456 |  0.80411  |
| 1.20 | 294 | 0.8017617 |  0.80182  |
+======+=====+===========+===========+


Power with sample sizes given by Diletti et al. at a GMR of 1.05 were below 80%, calculated both with R and StudySize…

A Monte Carlo Simulation (1000000 runs) for GMR=1.05 and 18 subjects in StudySize resulted in:
Power 0.8006 (95% coverage probability: 0.7998-0.8013).

Differences may be due to the implementation of the algorithm to obtain the value of the noncentral t-distribution by numeric integration...

Maybe somebody of you has access to SAS or software specialized in power analysis (e.g., PASS or nQuery Advisor) and would like to check these results?

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
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,668 registered users;
53 visitors (0 registered, 53 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: 08:36 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