total (pooled) variance: examples [Power / Sample Size]

posted by BEQool  – 2023-04-22 20:20 (1147 d 21:00 ago) – Posting: # 23537
Views: 10,939

Thank you zizou for the explanation.

So if we have e.g. 3x6x3 Williams crossover design (with 3 treatments), the number in the denominator depends on the approach we use?
If we use "Two at a Time" approach with incomplete block designs, we are only evaluating 2 treatments and therefore we should use number 2 in the denominator; but if we use "All at Once" approach, we are evaluating all 3 treatments and we have to use number 3 in the denominator?

Additional question (just to be sure): we also use number 2 in the denominator (to get inter-subject variance) when we have replicate designs with 2 treatments (regradless of the partial- or full-replicate design)?

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,653 posts in 4,991 threads, 1,570 registered users;
98 visitors (0 registered, 98 guests [including 23 identified bots]).
Forum time: 17:20 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

To propose that poor design can be corrected by subtle analysis techniques
is contrary to good scientific thinking.    Stuart J. Pocock

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