The mysterious ρ [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2018-02-08 22:40 (2564 d 20:29 ago) – Posting: # 18382
Views: 17,477

Hi Louis,

❝ But no one knows, at least not me, to what number the correlation should be set in practice.

❝ The authors team of the R package PowerTOST is currently discussing that theme. May be we came out with some aid in the near future.


Current state of affairs about the mysterious ρ:

[image]


Runtime 0.78 seconds. 6176 subjects in 124 data sets of 98 2×2×2 studies (74 analytes).
Evaluated by: lm(log(PK) ~ sequence+subject+period+treatment, data=study)
              PE.AUC[study]  <- exp(summary(model.AUC)$coef["treatmentT", "Estimate"])
              PE.Cmax[study] <- exp(summary(model.Cmax)$coef["treatmentT", "Estimate"])
              model.rho <- lm(PE.Cmax ~ PE.AUC)
              rho       <- sqrt(summary(model.rho)$r.squared)

rho         : 0.6983



PS: No, I’m not underpowering my studies for Cmax. Some were so old that they were powered for an acceptance range of 75–133% or even 70–143%. ;-) Was too lazy to browse through the protocols…

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

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

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,381 posts in 4,914 threads, 1,663 registered users;
34 visitors (0 registered, 34 guests [including 10 identified bots]).
Forum time: 19:09 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Science is built up with facts, as a house is with stones.
But a collection of facts is no more a science
than a heap of stones is a house.    Henri Poincaré

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