Inter and Total Variability [Power / Sample Size]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2011-09-14 02:43 (4987 d 14:22 ago) – Posting: # 7351
Views: 13,282

Dear Benjamin,

THX for thinking it over again and forcing me to dig out old references. My output (given by a software I have written in the mid-1980s) didn’t contain MSEt (only SSEt and df). In this table I thoughtlessly used MSEt = SSEt/df…

❝ […] MSEt is not the sum of MSEw and MSEB, it's MSEw + (MSEB - MSEW)/2.


Which reduces to MSEt = (MSEB + MSEW)/2. q.e.d.
I should have paid more attention to my own slide. :angry:
Therefore:
Study           CVintra  CVinter  CVtotal   MSEw     MSEB     MSEt
Methylphenidate  7.00%  19.13%  20.41%   0.004882 0.076746 0.040814
Lansoprazole    47.01%  25.14%  54.60%   0.199667 0.322229 0.260948

The percentage CVtotal intra/total is nonsense (apples and oranges).

❝ And σ²inter is estimated by (MSEB - MSEW)/2 and not MSEB (in the references you posted these values are plugged in for calculating the corresponding CV, so I guess these values themselves represent direct estimates for the variances).


Right.

❝ Then of course it makes sense. A conservative estimator for the intra variability would then be MSE_t.


Also correct. But then we are relying on:
[image]

In the methylphenidate example conservatism will be very expensive.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,669 registered users;
124 visitors (0 registered, 124 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: 17:05 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

We should not speak so that it is possible
for the audience to understand us,
but so that it is impossible
for them to misunderstand us.    Quintilian

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