evaluation of tmax: use of relative effects? [Nonparametrics]

posted by martin  – Austria, 2010-09-16 20:04 (5261 d 07:22 ago) – Posting: # 5920
Views: 21,640

dear d_labes and HS!

I spend some time on thinking how to compare tmax and have some doubts that using the difference between average values (e.g. medians, Hodges-Lehmann or Harrell-Davis estimate) is appropriate as the effect size in tmax between test and reference depends on the sampling times used.

For this reason I would suggest using relative effects (e.g. implemented in R package nparcomp).

Definition (taken from this presentation http://www.biopharmnet.com/doc/2010_05_20_webinar.pdf ):
"The relative effect is a a measure of how often a random subject receiving treatment X will outperform a random subject receiving treatment Y. It can be interpreted as a probability that a randomly selected patient in the control reveals a smaller response value than a randomly selected patient in the treatment group"

naive application of d_labes dataset:

npar.t.test(pdiff~sequence, conflevel = 0.1, data=PKt)

Nonparametric Behrens-Fisher Problem
NOTE:
*-----------Analysis of relative effects-----------*
- Confidence interval for relative effect p(i,j)
     with confidence level 0.9
- Method =  Delta-Method (Logit)
- p.perm = p-value of the Neubert-Brunner permutation test
- p-Values for  H_0: p(i,j)=1/2
 
*----------------Interpretation--------------------*
p(a,b) > 1/2 : b tends to be larger than a
*-------------------Wilcox.Test--------------------*
- Asymptotic Wilcoxon Test
- In this setup you can only test H_0:F_i = F_j
*--------------------------------------------------*
$Data.Info
  Sample Size
1     RT    7
2     TR    7

$Analysis.of.relative.effects
  Comparison rel.effect confidence.interval   t.value p.value p.perm
1   p(RT,TR)      0.633   [ 0.354 ; 0.844 ] 0.7804535   0.435   0.41

$Wilcoxon.Test
  Comparison rel.effect   p.value
1   p(RT,TR)      0.633 0.4345742


what do you think about using relative effects for comparing tmax values between test and reference?

best regards

martin

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,379 posts in 4,913 threads, 1,661 registered users;
257 visitors (0 registered, 257 guests [including 16 identified bots]).
Forum time: 02:27 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Statistics is the art of never having to say you’re wrong.
Variance is what any two statisticians are at.    C.J. Bradfield

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