ANOVA party prevails [BE/BA News]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2011-03-17 12:00 (4345 d 10:30 ago) – Posting: # 6770
Views: 32,666

(edited by d_labes on 2011-03-17 14:06)

Dear All,

that makes me dumbfound! :crying:
Seems the ANOVA fraction of EMA statisticians has triumphed all along the line. Thus our crossing fingers was of no effect.

To summarize my understanding of this so-called "clarification":Do you think I have got their points?

The rationale behind that all I can't and will not discuss seriously :no:.
I thank my God that I'm only a quantum-theoretical chemist educationally and not a statistician. Thus I must not understand :cool:.

BTW: The CVWT of Method C from SAS for dataset II is 3.87%.
Proc MIXED is complaining: The Mixed Procedure
Convergence criteria met but final hessian is not positive definite.

This is a strong sign of an over-specified model. That may be one of the sources of wider CIs compared to the simpler models.

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,485 posts in 4,710 threads, 1,603 registered users;
27 visitors (0 registered, 27 guests [including 12 identified bots]).
Forum time: 22:30 CET (Europe/Vienna)

The difference between a surrogate and a true endpoint
is like the difference between a cheque and cash.
You can get the cheque earlier but then,
of course, it might bounce.    Stephen Senn

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