"ranking" William designs [Design Issues]

posted by mittyri  – Russia, 2025-02-19 22:08 (82 d 22:38 ago) – Posting: # 24364
Views: 769

Hi Shuanghe,

BEQool is right.

There is indeed a “ranking” in the sense that only certain sequences truly satisfy the balance criteria for a Williams design. In a four‐treatment crossover, there are exactly six acceptable Williams designs that guarantee each treatment immediately follows every other treatment exactly once. Your design Y is one of those six, whereas design X is not. Take a look at the excellent article prepared by Helmut regarding Higher-Order Crossover Designs, especially at Acknowledgment section ;-)

Design Y is generally considered superior to Design X when the primary concern is the first-order carryover effect (the direct influence of one treatment on the immediately following treatment). Design Y ensures that every treatment follows every other treatment exactly once. This provides the most balanced estimate of first-order carryover effects. It allows you to estimate the direct carryover effect of A on B, B on A, A on C, C on A, etc., with equal precision.

Kind regards,
Mittyri

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,669 registered users;
165 visitors (0 registered, 165 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: 21:46 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

No matter what side of the argument you are on,
you always find people on your side
that you wish were on the other.    Thomas Berger

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