Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

UMP - uniformly more powerful test [Power / Sample Size]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2016-01-15 21:08 (3016 d 14:19 ago) – Posting: # 15834
Views: 10,914

Dear Helmut,

❝ Leaving the question open: Which is the most powerful test?

From the early days of (bio)equivalence tests there where some candidates:

Berger, Hsu
"Bioequivalence Trials, Intersection-Union Tests and Equivalence Confidence Sets"
Statist. Sci. Volume 11, Number 4 (1996), 283-319.

Hsu et al.
Confidence intervals associated with tests for bioequivalence
Biometrika (1994), 81,1 , pp. 103-14

Brown L.D., Hwang J.T.G. and Munk A.
An Unbiased Test for the Bioequivalence Problem
The Annals of Statistics 1997, Vol. 25, No. 6, 2345–2367

and some more of these sort of papers.

But unfortunately no one of these made it.

BTW: I dont think that I tell you news with that citations .

---

Count up: post 994

Complete thread:

• Post hoc Power Jay 2016-01-08 06:49 [Power / Sample Size] 
  • Post hoc Power ElMaestro 2016-01-08 15:07
  • Post hoc Power Helmut 2016-01-09 14:21
    • Post hoc Power Jay 2016-01-11 10:59
      • PE outside the acceptance range Helmut 2016-01-11 14:02
        • PE outside the acceptance range Jay 2016-01-13 08:24
          • Power for PE outside the acceptance range d_labes 2016-01-13 11:59
          • PE at border of the AR: power ≡ 0.05 Helmut 2016-01-13 12:38
            • PE at border of the AR: power ≡ 0.05 ? d_labes 2016-01-13 13:21
              • PE at border of the AR: power ≤0.05! Helmut 2016-01-14 01:29
                • UMP - uniformly more powerful testd_labes 2016-01-15 20:08
                • PE at border of the AR: power ≤0.05! zizou 2016-01-24 22:12
                  • Smoothing artifact Helmut 2016-01-25 14:15