Simulations [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2013-12-05 16:51 (4218 d 07:55 ago) – Posting: # 12006
Views: 25,462

Hi Kumar,

❝ In my study CV is around 19% and sample size was 28 so can I use CV=20% and sample size stage 1(n1)=24 here as 28 is not there in the table.

❝ In second case upper limit of type 1 error rate is 0.05032 (exceeding 0.05),Is it means that here type 1 error inflation is present and regulator may reject the application.


I don’t understand what you want to achieve here. In 106 simulations every­thing <0.05036 is not significantly >0.05. Potvin et al. covered the entire range of n1 12–60 and CV 10–100%. For Method B the largest inflation was 0.0485 and for Method C 0.0510. I would not step into this muddle unless I actually receive a deficiency letter. Did you?

Sometimes you get significant results. Why not? I simulated your CV 19% and n1 28. 106 simulations each, Method C.
run   αemp
 1  0.049872
 2  0.049777
 3  0.050218
 4  0.049988
 5  0.049882
 6  0.050440 *
 7  0.049946
 8  0.050084
 9  0.050139
10  0.050289

Now what?

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, 1,672 registered users;
267 visitors (0 registered, 267 guests [including 1 identified bots]).
Forum time: 01:47 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Reach for the stars,
even if you have to stand on a cactus.    Susan Longacre

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