Validated frameworks; observed GMR not relevant [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by Silva – Portugal, 2017-03-09 01:26 (1322 d 15:05 ago) – Posting: # 17143
Views: 10,393

Hi Helmut

Trying to learn technical issues of TSD.

In the example you gave:

 power.2stage(CV=0.2, n1=12, alpha=c(0.0294, 0.0294), theta0=1.25,
              targetpower=0.8, pmethod="shifted", nsims=1e6)$pBE
 # [1] 0.046352
# n1 within validated range: TIE <0.05.

why the use of theta0 as 1.25 and not as GMR value? I understand the use of GMR of 0.95 for Potvin B method (as it was validated with this assumption), but don´t understant the meaning of theta0.

According to Power2Stage manual, theta 0 corresponds to the True ratio of T/R for simulating. (Defaults to the GMR argument if missing).

What is the meaning of "True ratio of T/R for simulating" and what is the difference for GMR?

Complete thread:

 Admin contact
21,173 posts in 4,412 threads, 1,476 registered users;
online 16 (0 registered, 16 guests [including 1 identified bots]).
Forum time: Wednesday 17:31 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

But it is in matters beyond the limits of mere rule
that the skill of the analyst is evinced.
He makes in silence a host of observations and inferences…    Edgar Allan Poe

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