Doubts about NCSS [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by zizou – Plzeň, Czech Republic, 2016-05-27 01:38 (2853 d 09:30 ago) – Posting: # 16366
Views: 28,830

Dear Helmut.

❝ Since in this post you reported 9.2 degrees of freedom for the intercept and 5.9 for the slope, why do NCSS’ 90% CIs not agree with the other packages (only the PEs)?


According to provided results, there are differences in Standard Errors. So I guess the differences of 90% CIs are due to SEs. You know [Lower Limit,Upper Limit] = PE ∓ SE*t(1-alpha,df). It seems like only SEs differ from other softwares in the right side of equation. :confused:

From the post with Compilation of results acc. to PEs NCSS uses REML and acc. to degrees of freedom 9.2 and 5.9 NCSS uses Satterthwaite's method. (if not lucky harmony)

Best regards,
zizou

REML, it's restricted!

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,940 posts in 4,812 threads, 1,639 registered users;
44 visitors (0 registered, 44 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: 10:09 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Those people who think they know everything
are a great annoyance to those of us who do.    Isaac Asimov

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