[Opinion] Should the 90% CI for GMR be required to encompass 1 [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by bebac_fan – US, 2018-03-29 13:46 (1594 d 09:20 ago) – Posting: # 18614
Views: 8,895

Hi Helmut,

Thank you for validating the issue (sort of?). I am having fun with this theoretical exercise.

Yes I am an R fanatic. I think I'm going to play with power.NTID and add a criteria that the GMR CI falls through 1.00.

I will report back.

Cheers,
BF


Edit: Full quote removed. Please delete everything from the text of the original poster which is not necessary in understanding your answer; see also this post #5[Helmut]

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,289 posts in 4,666 threads, 1,585 registered users;
online 6 (0 registered, 6 guests [including 3 identified bots]).
Forum time: Tuesday 23:07 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The existing scientific concepts cover always only
a very limited part of reality,
and the other part that has not yet
been understood is infinite.    Werner Heisenberg

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