lsmeans not estimable, but lsmean differences are? [🇷 for BE/BA]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2019-02-26 13:40 (1260 d 07:10 ago) – Posting: # 19975
Views: 2,604

Hi all,

I have a funny situation with one of my datasets:

In a semireplicated trial I am using the lsmeans package and syntax like
lnCI=confint(pairs(lsmeans(M, "Trt"), reverse =F), level=0.9)


to extract CIs from my model M where treatment is coded as "Trt" having two levels and it works just fine.

However, if I do something like
lsmeans(M, "Trt")


then I am getting "nonEst" of both rows in the column for the derived lsmeans.

So, R is telling me that it can derive a difference of lsmeans but it can't derive the lsmeans individually. I find this quite annoying, possibly hard to believe. On processing the same data with WNL, it (WNL) seems to be able to derive LSmeans, and it is getting the same difference in LSmeans as R.

Did anyone encounter this situation? I am quite baffled myself :confused:. Google isn't my friend. My own understanding of the LSmean derivation is a bit lacking, otherwise I'd much prefer to just write code myself and not rely on the package.

I really wish I could publish the dataset for someone to reproduce the situation, but I can't offer to do so at present.

Many thanks.:-)

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,289 posts in 4,666 threads, 1,585 registered users;
online 8 (0 registered, 8 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Tuesday 21:51 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The existing scientific concepts cover always only
a very limited part of reality,
and the other part that has not yet
been understood is infinite.    Werner Heisenberg

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