Is it still unclear :( ? [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by Anu – India, 2013-08-28 11:08 (4315 d 09:57 ago) – Posting: # 11365
Views: 6,539

Hi Helmut,

❝ This doesn’t makes sense to me. Do you mean data for a test product (in % of the reference)?


Actually the 90% CI is for the test-reference

❝ Duno. I don’t believe in these numbers – where do they come from?


I don't have any raw data, just got this confidence interval (on -20% to +20%) scale from my boss. And its a two way cross over study with 21 subjects. On the basis of which my objective is to calculate the sample size. Which I will be doing with R software and the FARTSSIE Excel sheet. So, it came in my mind why not to transform this CI into (80.00 to 125.00)%. It should be possible? Does there exist any such transformation relation between these two different CI scales i.e (80.00 to 125.00)% and (-20.00 to +20.00)?

Thanks & Regards
Anu

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,671 registered users;
58 visitors (0 registered, 58 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: 21:06 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Medical researches can be divided into two sorts:
those who think that meta is better and those
who believe that pooling is fooling.    Stephen Senn

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