Group “effect” [Design Issues]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2019-07-20 14:02 (593 d 21:45 ago) – Posting: # 20413
Views: 2,513

Hi GM,

» […] fixed effects used in general crossover studies and possible reasons for significant results of these fixed effects, I didn't found any relevant reasons for the significant group effect.

The p-value tells you only how likely something occurs. If you set your limit to 0.05 that means that you consider a p-value <0.05 denoting an effect which occurred not by pure chance. The reason for an effect is beyond the reach of statistics.
Think about the subject-term. It is always highly significant.* Recode the common effects to something neutral (say, response → Y, sequence → a, subject → b, period → c, treatment → d ) and provide the data to a statistician without telling the background to evaluate the linear model $$\ln(Y) \sim a+b+c+d$$ or – if you insist on the stupid over-specified one given in the guidelines – $$\ln(Y) \sim a+b(a)+c+d$$ Hey, \(p(b)\) or \(p(b(a)) = 0.00000314\). Now ask for a “reason”.
Answer: :ponder:

Science is wonderfully equipped to answer the question “How?”
but it gets terribly confused when you ask the question “Why?”
   Erwin Chargaff

Ask a physicist what gravity is. No, not how it is described in physics. You will be surprised.

» Anybody know about the possible reasons for significant group effect...?

Chance? IMHO, testing for it is futile (see there).

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖
Helmut Schütz

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

Complete thread:

 Admin contact
21,366 posts in 4,462 threads, 1,493 registered users;
online 7 (0 registered, 7 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Friday 10:48 CET (Europe/Vienna)

The statistician has no magic touch by which
he may come in at the stage of tabulation
and make something of nothing.    W. Edwards Deming

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