Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Relationship between calculated 90% CI and sign. treatment effect in BE [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by DavidManteigas – Portugal, 2017-03-29 14:30 (3379 d 18:50 ago) – Posting: # 17204
Views: 12,195

Hi Gm,

Your code seems ok to me.

In my opinion, your result is completly normal since the p-value is significant at the 10% significance level, which compares with the 90% CI with obtained. ElMaestro has a different opinion though, so you should follow our discussion

Regards,
David

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-sided d_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
        • 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 BEDavidManteigas 2017-03-29 12:30