Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Decision scheme 'without' power check [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2011-10-26 17:24 (4988 d 01:19 ago) – Posting: # 7548
Views: 18,822

Dear d_labes,

❝ That would mean what in my last scheme hiding the power check step?

• If we are going to stage 2 is clear (n_est > n₁).
  

• Calculate sample size with alpha₁ because we here don't know if we are going to stage 2? That would be against my intuition.
  

  ❝

• if n_est ≤ n₁ -> stop: fail with BE evaluated at alpha₁?

Oh bugger: I lost a code somewhere. How do I make the following appear black?

As long as "if n_est≤n1" is essentially similar (pun intended) to "power>80 at alpha₁" I think my walnut-sized brain agrees with you.

You got mail.

Best regards,
EM.

---

Edit: Sorry for the formating troubles in the quoted list. The regex in the PHP-script translating BBcodes to (X)HTML/CSS is not trivial. I couldn’t do better. Bug filed. [Helmut]

Complete thread:

• 2-stage design - power evaluation d_labes 2011-10-12 11:10 
  • No opinions out there? d_labes 2011-10-26 09:14
    • Opinion yes, answer no ElMaestro 2011-10-26 11:15
      • Decision scheme without (?) power check d_labes 2011-10-26 13:00
        • Decision scheme without (?) power check ElMaestro 2011-10-26 13:20
          • Decision scheme 'without' power check d_labes 2011-10-26 14:51
            • Decision scheme 'without' power checkElMaestro 2011-10-26 15:24
              • Numerical example d_labes 2011-10-26 16:28
                • Numerical example ElMaestro 2011-10-26 16:49
                  • Potvin C with unsymmetrical alphas d_labes 2011-10-27 14:54
                    • Potvin B, C, or D? Helmut 2011-10-27 22:52
                    • Two-stage (classical Pocock) and the FDA Helmut 2011-10-31 02:36
  • Weirdo paper ElMaestro 2011-11-30 18:04
    • Weirdo paper Helmut 2011-11-30 23:45
      • Weirdo paper ElMaestro 2011-12-01 07:16