Two-stage design ❌ RSABE [Design Issues]
sorry. See there.
If you are – very – courageous, you can opt for Bonferroni (α = 0.025). All methods I know (for 2×2×2 crossover and parallel designs) require less adjustments, i.e., a higher α. No idea whether that’s acceptable. Ask the OGD.
library(PowerTOST)
theta0 <- 0.90
target <- 0.80
design <- "2x2x4"
CV <- seq(0.3, 0.8, 0.025)
res <- data.frame(CV = sprintf("%.1f%%", 100*CV))
for (j in 1:nrow(res)) {
# sample size for α = 0.05
res$n1[j] <- sampleN.RSABE(alpha = 0.05, CV = CV[j],
theta0 = theta0, targetpower = target,
design = design, details = FALSE,
print = FALSE)[["Sample size"]]
# sample size for α = 0.025
res$n2[j] <- sampleN.RSABE(alpha = 0.025, CV = CV[j],
theta0 = theta0, targetpower = target,
design = design, details = FALSE,
print = FALSE)[["Sample size"]]
}
res$penalty <- sprintf("%+.1f%%", 100*(res$n2-res$n1)/res$n1)
names(res)[2:3] <- c("n (alpha=0.05)", "n (alpha=0.025)")
print(res, row.names = FALSE)
CV n (alpha=0.05) n (alpha=0.025) penalty
30.0% 32 40 +25.0%
32.5% 30 38 +26.7%
35.0% 28 34 +21.4%
37.5% 26 32 +23.1%
40.0% 24 30 +25.0%
42.5% 24 30 +25.0%
45.0% 24 28 +16.7%
47.5% 22 28 +27.3%
50.0% 22 28 +27.3%
52.5% 22 26 +18.2%
55.0% 22 26 +18.2%
57.5% 22 26 +18.2%
60.0% 24 26 +8.3%
62.5% 24 26 +8.3%
65.0% 24 28 +16.7%
67.5% 24 28 +16.7%
70.0% 26 28 +7.7%
72.5% 26 28 +7.7%
75.0% 26 28 +7.7%
77.5% 28 30 +7.1%
80.0% 28 30 +7.1%
Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна!
Helmut Schütz
The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes
Complete thread:
- Two-stage replicate design studies for RSABE Achievwin 2021-05-14 19:20 [Design Issues]
- Two-stage design ❌ RSABEHelmut 2021-05-14 20:14
- Two-stage design ❌ RSABE Achievwin 2021-05-19 19:08
- Two-stage design & RSABE: Forget it! Helmut 2021-05-19 20:40
- Two-stage design ❌ RSABE Achievwin 2021-05-19 19:08
- Two-stage design ❌ RSABEHelmut 2021-05-14 20:14