0.95 or 1.05 [Power / Sample Size]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2018-10-10 13:41 (1407 d 04:05 ago) – Posting: # 19428
Views: 23,898

Hi Oleg,

» […] can you explain your message to my colleagues in russian here

Interesting thread (as far as [image] translate took me). IIRC, some posters were not sure whether to use an assumed T/R-ratio of 0.95 or 1.05. Have a look at this post and that one. In short, if you assume a 5% difference but are not (very!) sure about the direction of the deviation (lower or higher than 100%), a study powered for 0.95 will always be sufficiently powered for 1.05 as well but not the other way ’round.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖 [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
22,305 posts in 4,668 threads, 1,587 registered users;
online 5 (1 registered, 4 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: Wednesday 17:47 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

There is no point in being precise when you don’t know
what you’re talking about.    attributed to John Tukey

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