Why not? [Power / Sample Size]
Hi John!
Essentially yes. You have to get the degrees of freedom right. See Detlew’s post. For your log AUCt data and my CI (ignoring the fact that you had 16, 17, and 18 subjects in the three sequences) I got:
Maybe it’s better to go with the linearized CI from the RSABE-code instead (no mixed-effects limbo). With the 90% CI of
P.S.: Any news from Donald Schuirmann?
❝ How does one back calculate the intrasubject CV (and MSE?) from the 90% confidence interval obtained for a three way partial replicate study? Can it be done using the same suggestion that you presented in your previous slides?
Essentially yes. You have to get the degrees of freedom right. See Detlew’s post. For your log AUCt data and my CI (ignoring the fact that you had 16, 17, and 18 subjects in the three sequences) I got:
require(PowerTOST)
CVfromCI(lower=0.874898, upper=1.02586, n=51, design="2x3x3", alpha=0.05)
[1] 0.2850511
require(PowerTOST)
CVfromCI(lower=0.874898, upper=1.02586, n=51, design="2x3x3", alpha=0.05,
robust=TRUE)
[1] 0.2820788
Maybe it’s better to go with the linearized CI from the RSABE-code instead (no mixed-effects limbo). With the 90% CI of
0.874723 – 1.02766
I got:require(PowerTOST)
CVfromCI(lower=0.874723, upper=1.02766, n=51, design="2x3x3", alpha=0.05)
[1] 0.2886897
- Documentation of PowerTOST/CVfromCI.
P.S.: Any news from Donald Schuirmann?
—
Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна!
Helmut Schütz
The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes
Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна!
Helmut Schütz
The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes
Complete thread:
- Reverse Engineering → Back calculate the intra CV jag009 2013-05-03 16:45 [Power / Sample Size]
- Why not?Helmut 2013-05-03 17:09
- Why not? jag009 2013-05-09 20:12
- degrees of freedom d_labes 2013-05-10 08:12
- Why not? jag009 2013-05-09 20:12
- Why not?Helmut 2013-05-03 17:09