the results of sample size based on PowerTOST [Software]

posted by ElMaestro  – Belgium?, 2018-07-31 11:07 (781 d 00:58 ago) – Posting: # 19119
Views: 4,158

Hi libaiyi,

» The design here is a three-period six-sequence William design. I just wondering when the study design is replicated, dose the power calculation method the same as what used in simple 2 by 2 cross over design? Thank you so much!:lol:

I am still somewhat baffled.
You have different SE's for the three comparisons, possibly suggesting that you are employing an EMA-style BE evaluation?

Anyways, if you are going for a 222BE design, then you can look at your MSE from the ANOVAs (plural, right?), convert them to CVs via CV=sqrt(exp(MSE)-1) and you have a decent variability estimate to plug in for any crossover design with or without scaling.

Your best point estimate is exp(-.2088)~0.81 with upper limit ~0.88, for the T-S pair. The others appear worse. I'd personally think twice, but I am widely known as a backward cowardly chicken.

Note, the opinion above implies logarithms and standard BE thinking.

Edit: Congratulations to your post № 1,500! [Helmut]

I could be wrong, but...

Best regards,

R's base package has 274 reserved words and operators, along with 1761 functions. I can use 18 of them (about 14 of them properly). I believe this makes me the Donald Trump of programming.

Complete thread:

 Admin contact
21,068 posts in 4,392 threads, 1,465 registered users;
online 14 (0 registered, 14 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: Saturday 12:05 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The purpose of models is not to fit the data,
but to sharpen the questions.    Samuel Karlin

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