alpha TOST is not alpha 2-sided [General Statistics]
My Dear!
I think here you err.
See this thread (evaluation without group effect):
p-value of treatment effect = 0.076998 (not significant at the 5% level)
90% CI = 90.76 ... 99.62% (doesn't contain 100%)
❝ (...) the p-value for "formulation" should also be significant at the 5% significance level assuming we work with alpha=5% and therefore 90% CI's.
❝ Alpha is alpha ...
I think here you err.
See this thread (evaluation without group effect):
p-value of treatment effect = 0.076998 (not significant at the 5% level)
90% CI = 90.76 ... 99.62% (doesn't contain 100%)
—
Regards,
Detlew
Regards,
Detlew
Complete thread:
- Relationship between calculated 90% CI and sign. treatment effect in BE GM 2017-03-27 19:40 [General Statistics]
- 1–2α CI and TOST at α 0.05 Helmut 2017-03-27 23:47
- 1–2α CI and TOST at α 0.05 GM 2017-03-28 06:50
- 1–2α CI and TOST at α 0.05 DavidManteigas 2017-03-28 11:48
- 1–2α CI and TOST at α 0.05 ElMaestro 2017-03-28 13:12
- alpha TOST is not alpha 2-sidedd_labes 2017-03-28 15:12
- Interesting! ElMaestro 2017-03-28 21:10
- Google has the answer d_labes 2017-03-29 08:20
- Interesting! DavidManteigas 2017-03-29 11:16
- Interesting! ElMaestro 2017-03-29 11:20
- Interesting! DavidManteigas 2017-03-29 12:28
- 95% CI for a test on difference d_labes 2017-03-29 14:24
- Interesting! GM 2017-03-29 20:06
- Interesting! nobody 2017-03-30 08:24
- Interesting! DavidManteigas 2017-03-29 12:28
- Interesting! ElMaestro 2017-03-29 11:20
- Interesting! ElMaestro 2017-03-28 21:10
- alpha TOST is not alpha 2-sidedd_labes 2017-03-28 15:12
- Relationship between calculated 90% CI and sign. treatment effect in BE GM 2017-03-29 12:11
- Relationship between calculated 90% CI and sign. treatment effect in BE DavidManteigas 2017-03-29 12:30
- 1–2α CI and TOST at α 0.05 ElMaestro 2017-03-28 13:12
- 1–2α CI and TOST at α 0.05 DavidManteigas 2017-03-28 11:48
- 1–2α CI and TOST at α 0.05 GM 2017-03-28 06:50
- 1–2α CI and TOST at α 0.05 Helmut 2017-03-27 23:47