Simulations mandatory [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2024-01-09 10:31 (885 d 17:41 ago) – Posting: # 23824
Views: 13,148

Hi Achievwin,

❝ Thank you for your nice reply.

Welcome.

Just to be clear: Some authors (right now I’m reviewing a manuscript submitted to Stat Med…) believe (‼) that Pocock’s \(\small{\color{Blue}{\alpha_\text{adj}=0.0294}}\) (94.12% CI) is ‘uni­versally’ valid – even for reference-scaling of HVDs. This is a gross misunderstanding and not even wrong. It was derived for superiority testing in a GSD (fixed sample size N) with one interim at – exactly – N/2 and known variances. The fact that it controlled the Type I Error in Pot­vin’s Method B (TSD in a 2×2×2 design) was a mere lucky punch.
In my example I needed \(\small{\color{Red}{\alpha_\text{adj}=0.0274}}\) (94.52% CI) to control the Type I Error.

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, 1,571 registered users;
118 visitors (0 registered, 118 guests [including 34 identified bots]).
Forum time: 05:13 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