Desultory thoughts [R for BE/BA]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2020-07-16 10:59 (76 d 19:15 ago) – Posting: # 21708
Views: 8,715

Hi ElMaestro,

» May I offer the completely opposite view? Search the forum for "bogus statement" :-D, check the SAS documentation for what the statement actually actually does to Proc GLM: […]

I know, I know. ;-)
I was talking about a mixed model and not the way how SAS uses the RANDOM statement in PROC GLM in order to get the DFs right.
A true all fixed effects model – with subjects instead of the crazy subjects(sequence) – requires unique coding of subjcts. I practice always the case (OK, maybe not in multicenter studies but then you have center as another fixed effect). I recently reviewed a manuscript where subjects in each sequence had the same codes. The authors obviously had no clue about how things work.

BTW, same agencies require that in crossovers CVintra and CVinter are reported. The latter is not possible when subject is a fixed effect.

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
21,090 posts in 4,398 threads, 1,469 registered users;
online 17 (0 registered, 17 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: Thursday 06:15 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

In these days, a man who says a thing cannot be done
is quite apt to be interrupted by some idiot doing it.    Elbert Green Hubbard

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