"ranking" William designs [Design Issues]

posted by mittyri  – Russia, 2025-02-19 22:08 (119 d 06:28 ago) – Posting: # 24364
Views: 1,795

Hi Shuanghe,

BEQool is right.

There is indeed a “ranking” in the sense that only certain sequences truly satisfy the balance criteria for a Williams design. In a four‐treatment crossover, there are exactly six acceptable Williams designs that guarantee each treatment immediately follows every other treatment exactly once. Your design Y is one of those six, whereas design X is not. Take a look at the excellent article prepared by Helmut regarding Higher-Order Crossover Designs, especially at Acknowledgment section ;-)

Design Y is generally considered superior to Design X when the primary concern is the first-order carryover effect (the direct influence of one treatment on the immediately following treatment). Design Y ensures that every treatment follows every other treatment exactly once. This provides the most balanced estimate of first-order carryover effects. It allows you to estimate the direct carryover effect of A on B, B on A, A on C, C on A, etc., with equal precision.

Kind regards,
Mittyri

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,674 registered users;
47 visitors (0 registered, 47 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: 05:36 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Philosophy, like medicine, has plenty of drugs, few good remedies,
and hardly any specific cures.    Sebastien-Roch Nicolas de Chamfort

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