Equal variances [🇷 for BE/BA]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2010-04-26 14:55 (5891 d 18:37 ago) – Posting: # 5231
Views: 67,886

Dear D. Labes,

❝ ❝ boxplot(lnAUC0t ~ drug, col="lightgray", yl)

❝ Ooops: > Error in eval(expr, envir, enclos) : object 'yl' not found


Shit! Of course instead of
boxplot(lnAUC0t ~ drug, col="lightgray", yl)
use
boxplot(lnAUC0t ~ drug, col="lightgray")

❝ A very fine example of hetero-scedasticity and eventually of non-normality :cool:.


Maybe. But we are not allowed to test that anyhow. ;-)
For non-bears, here is the dataset (imbalanced, 27 subjects) for download.

❝ With t-test assuming equal variances one gets:

         Point Estimate   CL90 lower   CL90 upper

❝ Ratio           101.61        83.31       123.92


❝ Homework: Compare this to the results of lm() or lme() in this thread

:-D.


Yes, sure. What else? That's why we should avoid it.

❝ To repeat my question above: Any hint for more then 2 groups?

❝ Very seldom for BE studies, I know. But according to Murphy's law I have to deal with a 3-parallel-group design already tomorrow.


I went through the literature last week and did not come to a conclusion yet. Essentially there are two approaches:So if you want to get an opinion for tomorrow: I would go with Welch-tests, because ANOVA (or lm and lme) assume homoscedasticity. See also:

Moser BK, Stevens GR. Homogeneity of variance in the two-sample means test. Amer Statist. 1992;46:19-21.


Depending on the study’s target I would consider a Bonferroni-adjustment (that’s even the original application: independent tests).

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;
110 visitors (0 registered, 110 guests [including 24 identified bots]).
Forum time: 09:33 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

To propose that poor design can be corrected by subtle analysis techniques
is contrary to good scientific thinking.    Stuart J. Pocock

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