Fixed Effects Muddleties [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2013-03-05 14:06 (4489 d 13:26 ago) – Posting: # 10155
Views: 11,218

Hi d_labes,

How was the holiday?

❝ IMHO you can't talk about inter-subject variance if using an "all effects as fixed" EMAphylistic model. In such a model there is only one error source, the residual error.


I completely agree and I think we mean the same - my point was that previously in this forum there was some confusion abut PROC GLM with the "random" statement giving the impression that a random effects (plural) model was applied. This isn't the case cf Bogus. I just wished to make sure this issue wasn't somehow derived from that confusion.

❝ If one is interested in inter-subject variance (to what end ever) a mixed model evaluated via real mixed model software is indispensable.


For a 2,2,2-BE design one can go via a normal linear model where the subject MS will do if subject is included as a term.

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,676 registered users;
49 visitors (0 registered, 49 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: 04:32 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Complex, statistically improbable things are by their nature
more difficult to explain than
simple, statistically probable things.    Richard Dawkins

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