NCSS vs. PHX/WNL vs. SAS [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2016-05-17 01:50  – Posting: # 16318
Views: 18,040

Hi Angus,

» I have repeated the above calculation in NCSS:
Intercept  1.9414  0.2496   0.000025 1.4849      2.3978      9.2
logDose    0.7617  0.0492   0.000005 0.6659      0.8576      5.9


Phoenix/WinNonlin:
           1.9414  0.2431   0.000020 1.4968      2.3860      9.2
           0.7617  0.0473   0.000004 0.6696      0.8539      5.9


Reported by Smith et al. (SAS Proc Mixed):
           1.94                      1.54        2.35
           0.7615                    0.679       0.844


Results by NCSS and Phoenix/WinNonlin are similar but don’t match SAS (whose CIs are wider). I love software.

Cheers,
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. ☼
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

Activity
 Mix view
Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum |  Admin contact
19,889 posts in 4,215 threads, 1,364 registered users;
online 6 (0 registered, 6 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time (Europe/Vienna): 08:37 CEST

I have no opinion about ‘incurred samples’ –
an expression which has no easily understandable
meaning for me in the English language.    Nick Holford

The BIOEQUIVALENCE / BIOAVAILABILITY FORUM is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5