how about randomly selected block sizes? [R for BE/BA]

posted by ElMaestro  – Belgium?, 2019-08-28 09:26 (393 d 11:04 ago) – Posting: # 20526
Views: 2,826

Hi yjlee168,

» The block size in package randomizeBE is fixed and its deafult is set to 2*number of sequences. Is it better to set the blocksize as randomly selected as suggested in this article?
»
» » ...RTFM

If blocksize is missing it defaults to 2*number of sequences.



I did not know of that paper or this kind of thinking - thank you for enlightening me.
I think the paper addresses bias through predictability. Imagine we have TR/RT and block size 4, and that you can tell the treatments apart though the study is supposed to be blind.
If you dose subject 1 and 2 in a given period with T then you can tell with certainty that the other two in the block will be given R.
BE trials tend to be open label. By this thinking the block size phenomenon would not affect the outcome or have the potential to bias it.

Noone says blocks are necessary at all. For trials at single centers in single groups, which acccount for the majority of BE trials, I don't see any particular need for blocks.

I could be wrong, but...

Best regards,
ElMaestro

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:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,074 posts in 4,394 threads, 1,468 registered users;
online 7 (0 registered, 7 guests [including 3 identified bots]).
Forum time: Thursday 20:30 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Enlightenment is man’s emergence from his self-imposed nonage
for which he himself was responsible.
Nonage is the inability to use one’s own intellect
without the direction of another.    Immanuel Kant

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