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

posted by bebac_fan – US, 2018-03-29 13:46 (1349 d 06:04 ago) – Posting: # 18614
Views: 8,564

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:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,788 posts in 4,557 threads, 1,548 registered users;
online 18 (0 registered, 18 guests [including 3 identified bots]).
Forum time: Tuesday 18:51 CET (Europe/Vienna)

A big computer, a complex algorithm and a long time
does not equal science.    Robert Gentleman

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