0.95 or 1.05 [Power / Sample Size]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2018-10-10 13:41 (838 d 17:34 ago) – Posting: # 19428
Views: 19,954

Hi Oleg,

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

Interesting thread (as far as Google-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 🖖
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,312 posts in 4,445 threads, 1,489 registered users;
online 7 (0 registered, 7 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Tuesday 06:15 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Any one who considers arithmetical methods
of producing random digits is, of course,
in a state of sin.    John von Neumann

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