Questions and Ambiguities [BE/BA News]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2011-03-28 16:16 (4866 d 00:58 ago) – Posting: # 6822
Views: 34,904

Dear Helmut,

❝ Period ratios (second / first administration):

❝ Type 3: SAS according to R-doc - 2 outliers (#46: 3.524, #45: 26.08)

❝ Type 5: or is this SAS? - 2 outliers

❝ Type 6: Minitab, SPSS, Phoenix/WinNonlin - 2 outliers

❝ ...

SAS has 5 different percentile definitions. The default is:
Let n*p=j+g where j is the integer part, g is the fractional part, n is the number of values, x the ordered values.
Let y denote the percentile. Then (SAS PCTLDEF=5)
  y = 0.5*(xj+xj+1) if g=0
  y = xj           if g>0

This corresponds to R's Type 2 I think.

❝ Don’t know what to do. :confused: Suggestions?

If the 'outlier' considerations based on the crippled EMA model makes any sense at all, which I'm not convinced at all :no:, I would vote for an analysis of the residuals, not the period ratios also they appeared a natural choice on the first view.
Pro's:Con's:But these Con's are unavoidable because of the EMA 'model', whatever here is modelled.
To add more ambiguities:



Complete thread:

UA Flag
 Admin contact
23,119 posts in 4,859 threads, 1,647 registered users;
36 visitors (0 registered, 36 guests [including 11 identified bots]).
Forum time: 17:15 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

You can’t really say “similar” if it’s the same again you want.
“Similar” means something different.    Anthony Burgess

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