Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum • R vs. R in partial replicate design

R vs. R in partial replicate design [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by d_labes – Berlin, Germany, 2012-10-11 11:43 (4636 d 13:33 ago) – Posting: # 9383
Views: 11,309

Mon Capitano!

Ok, now I have the LSMeans (in SASophylistic way as standard or in R using your model).

In case of using all data without recoding I have them for T and R.
With recoding to occasions for T and R1,R2.

Or using only the data for R (EMA crippled model) without recoding I have it for R (=intercept). With recoding I have them for R1 and R2.

And now? How to get a 90% CI for R vs. R?
Simple use R1-R2 of the recoded data?
Or anything else?

—
Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

Ref. vs. Ref. in partial replicate design d_labes 2012-04-25 15:52 [RSABE / ABEL]
- Ref. vs. Ref. in partial replicate design again d_labes 2012-10-10 10:56
- Ref. vs. Ref. in partial replicate design ElMaestro 2012-10-10 12:39
  - Ref. vs. Ref. in partial replicate design d_labes 2012-10-10 16:26
    - Ref. vs. Ref. in partial replicate design ElMaestro 2012-10-10 17:16
      - R vs. R in partial replicate designd_labes 2012-10-11 09:43
        
        R1 vs R2 ElMaestro 2012-10-11 10:26
        
        R1 vs R2 d_labes 2012-10-11 12:01
        
        R1 vs R2 ElMaestro 2012-10-11 12:09
        
        R1 vs R2 d_labes 2012-10-11 12:46
        
        treatment df ElMaestro 2012-10-11 13:38
        
        Missunderstanding d_labes 2012-10-11 16:34
        
        Missunderstanding, crippled ElMaestro 2012-10-11 18:12
        
        EMA crippled method - R peculiarities d_labes 2012-10-12 14:54
        
        All is good, just forget ANOVA - you don't need it! ElMaestro 2012-10-12 16:25
        
        Just forget ANOVA. What next? d_labes 2012-10-15 08:35
        
        Just forget ANOVA. What next? ElMaestro 2012-10-15 10:04