Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

the results of sample size based on PowerTOST [Software]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2018-07-27 21:57 (1886 d 20:08 ago) – Posting: # 19111
Views: 5,500
(edited by Ohlbe on 2018-07-28 11:07)

❝ Hi Libaiyi,

❝

❝ ❝ I am confused about the relationship between power and period. Are the power calculation method applied in 2*2, 3*3 and 2*4 designs the same? For example, if I have the result like this of the study design as T-S-R, could I use the same method to calculate power separately for T-R and S-R? Should I get two power as the result? And, what about parallel design?

❝ ❝

❝ ❝

That table looks strange. You seem to have a pair for which the CI is not estimable?? And what about alpha 0.1? Would you be after a two-sided CI with 80% coverage (yes I am aware of the ridiculous alpha in the usual SAS code for BE, but is this table derived from one such)?

I have no idea what the intention is, it just looks strange to me, and I am sure that if I got such a table in one of my studies then I would not be answering the question I was really asking.

---

Edit: screwed up post deleted [Ohlbe]

Complete thread:

• the results of sample size based on PowerTOST libaiyi 2018-07-27 05:34 [Software] 
  • sample size based on PowerTOST: total number of subjects Helmut 2018-07-27 11:24
    • sample size based on PowerTOST: total number of subjects libaiyi 2018-07-27 11:49
  • the results of sample size based on PowerTOSTElMaestro 2018-07-27 19:57
    • Design with not estimable contrast d_labes 2018-07-28 12:43
    • the results of sample size based on PowerTOST libaiyi 2018-07-31 04:13
      • the results of sample size based on PowerTOST ElMaestro 2018-07-31 11:07