“Type 1” slightly higher power than “Type 2” for the same adj. α [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2017-02-18 11:51  – Posting: # 17081
Views: 10,612

Hi BE-proff,

I agree with ElMaestro.

» 2) Why Method C is considered "better" for sponsors than Method B?

Unfortunately there is an „inflation” of letters denoting methods.
Therefore, I suggested* to use “Type 1” (B, E, …) and “Type 2” (C, D, C/D, F, …) instead.

“Type 1”

[image]


“Type 2”

[image]


In “Type 2” TSDs the conventional (unadjusted) α 0.05 may be used in the first stage (dependent on interim power). Hence, under certain conditions you have a decent chance to stop already in the first stage with no sample size penalty (due to the mandatory adjusted α in “Type 1” TSDs).

Potvin et al. recommended Method C over B due to its higher power. Examples (power by the noncentral t-approximation):

n1 CV (%)   B      C   
12   10   0.97697 0.98858
24   20   0.88046 0.90882
36   30   0.83704 0.84676
48   40   0.82901 0.82838
60   50   0.82477 0.82405




Cheers,
Helmut Schütz
[image]

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

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
20,463 posts in 4,297 threads, 1,415 registered users;
online 6 (1 registered, 5 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time (Europe/Vienna): 00:20 CEST

Half of the modern drugs could well be thrown out of the window,
except that the birds might eat them.    Martin H. Fischer

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