Fixed Effects Muddleties [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2013-03-05 14:06 (4431 d 03:51 ago) – Posting: # 10155
Views: 10,935

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, 1,670 registered users;
19 visitors (0 registered, 19 guests [including 1 identified bots]).
Forum time: 18:57 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The true Enlightenment thinker, the true rationalist,
never wants to talk anyone into anything.
No, he does not even want to convince;
all the time he is aware that he may be wrong.    Karl R. Popper

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