Log in
RegisterBack to the Future [Design Issues]
Dear Helmut!
You are reading my thoughts, I've just remembered that formulas, they go from russian recomendations, 2004.
By the way, there is a mistake in the first formula: comparing it with the data provided in this article (Chow S.-C., Wang H. On Sample Size Calculation in Bioequivalence Trials, Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2001;12(12):1865–8. Chow S.-C., Wang H.) there should be β/2.
Funny is that there was no formal occasion to ask us to calculate it, the rest is not funny at all.
So if they want aposteriory power they'll get it. I'll just take the principles, kindly presented by yicaoting , and calculate something like winnonlin's power. Of course it would be greater (completely different sense), hoping it would be sufficient...
❝ What is sufficient for them? Anything ≥80%? Smells of the end of Appendix 3 of Russia’s GLs of 2004 and 2008
You are reading my thoughts, I've just remembered that formulas, they go from russian recomendations, 2004.
❝ ![[image]](img/uploaded/image384.png)
❝ In case of disruption the assumption for mean values equality the equation could be modified like this:
❝ ![[image]](img/uploaded/image385.png)
By the way, there is a mistake in the first formula: comparing it with the data provided in this article (Chow S.-C., Wang H. On Sample Size Calculation in Bioequivalence Trials, Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2001;12(12):1865–8. Chow S.-C., Wang H.) there should be β/2.
Funny is that there was no formal occasion to ask us to calculate it, the rest is not funny at all.
So if they want aposteriory power they'll get it. I'll just take the principles, kindly presented by yicaoting , and calculate something like winnonlin's power. Of course it would be greater (completely different sense), hoping it would be sufficient...
—
"Being in minority, even a minority of one, did not make you mad"
"Being in minority, even a minority of one, did not make you mad"
Complete thread:
- Study conduct in groups Smitha 2015-02-02 04:21
![[Mix]](https://static.bebac.at/img/mix.png "open in Mix view")
- Study conduct in groups ElMaestro 2015-02-02 08:21
- Study conduct in groups Helmut 2015-02-02 13:08
- Study conduct in groups Smitha 2015-02-04 04:30
- Study conduct in groups Helmut 2015-02-04 12:57
- Study conduct in groups felipeberlinski 2015-02-04 22:36
- Study conduct in groups ElMaestro 2015-02-04 23:58
- Significant ≠ relevant Helmut 2015-02-05 00:49
- Significant ≠ relevant Astea 2016-03-24 20:10
- Significant ≠ relevant ElMaestro 2016-03-24 23:12
- Significant ≠ relevant zizou 2016-03-25 21:41
- Loss of power etc. Helmut 2016-03-26 14:46
- Loss of power etc. Astea 2016-03-27 21:18
- Loss of power etc. zizou 2016-03-27 23:44
- Combined power? Helmut 2016-03-28 14:29
- Loss of power etc. Astea 2016-03-28 23:57
- Loss of power etc. ElMaestro 2016-03-29 00:16
- Mystery Helmut 2016-03-29 17:28
- Back to the FutureAstea 2016-03-29 21:57
- Back to the Future ElMaestro 2016-03-29 23:11
- Using lectures != Reading them mittyri 2016-03-30 00:17
- Back to the Future ElMaestro 2016-03-29 23:11
- Back to the FutureAstea 2016-03-29 21:57
- Loss of power etc. Helmut 2016-03-26 14:46
- Significant ≠ relevant Astea 2016-03-24 20:10
- Study conduct in groups felipeberlinski 2015-02-04 22:36
- Study conduct in groups Helmut 2015-02-04 12:57
- Study conduct in groups Smitha 2015-02-04 04:30
Ing. Helmut Schütz