Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum • Apples are pears by comparing the weight

Apples are pears by comparing the weight [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by d_labes – Berlin, Germany, 2015-12-03 10:16 (3489 d 10:22 ago) – Posting: # 15691
Views: 16,032

Dear Helmut,

❝ The line

❝ res[j, 7] <- sprintf("%.0f", max(cum))

❝ should be replaced by

❝ res[j, 7] <- sprintf("%.1f", (1-tmp1$pct_s2/100)*n[1] +


❝                                 (tmp1$pct_s2/100)*max(cum))

❝

❝ E[N]


❝             ───────────
❝ expected N   GSD    TSD
❝ ───────────────────────

❝     50      71.3   63.7

❝    100      84.6   99.2

❝ Interesting.

:confused:

What's your expected N?

BTW: ? cumsum.

—
Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

Adaptive TSD vs. “classical” GSD Helmut 2015-11-27 19:05
- Adaptive TSD vs. “classical” GSD ElMaestro 2015-11-27 19:54
- “classical” GSD - E[n] d_labes 2015-11-30 11:15
  - Apples are pears by comparing the weight Helmut 2015-12-01 16:35
    - Apples are pears by comparing the weightd_labes 2015-12-03 09:16
      - Apples are pears by comparing the weight Helmut 2015-12-03 13:10
        
        Oranges d_labes 2015-12-03 13:56
- Adaptive TSD vs. “classical” GSD Ben 2015-12-02 19:27
  - Adaptive TSD vs. “classical” GSD Helmut 2015-12-03 03:11
    - “classical” GSD alpha's d_labes 2015-12-03 09:47
      - N sufficiently large‽ Helmut 2015-12-03 14:56
        
        An other one with 0.0304 d_labes 2015-12-03 16:15
        
        An other one with 0.0304 Helmut 2015-12-03 16:26
    - Adaptive TSD vs. “classical” GSD Ben 2016-01-10 12:43

Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,673 registered users;
34 visitors (0 registered, 34 guests [including 21 identified bots]).
Forum time: 21:38 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Medical researches can be divided into two sorts:
those who think that meta is better and those
who believe that pooling is fooling. Stephen Senn

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC

Ing. Helmut Schütz