Replicate Design: Scaling FDA [RSABE / ABEL]
Dear all,
While for EMA the 90% CI must fall within exp(± k*σWR), where k=0.760, the FDA has a different favored approach. One has to calculate the upper 95% limit of (μT-μR)2 - 0.797σWR2 and check whether it falls below 0 or not (btw, nice slides Helmut). Now, my question is whether this approach using the 95% upper limit can also be rephrased (equivalently) in an "easier" way, that is, in terms of 90% CI must fall within exp(± k*σWR) (using just a different k). On these slides from the FDA it seems that it is the same as scaling the acceptance range using k=0.893. Is it really equivalent?
Thanks,
Ben
Edit: Category changed. [Helmut]
While for EMA the 90% CI must fall within exp(± k*σWR), where k=0.760, the FDA has a different favored approach. One has to calculate the upper 95% limit of (μT-μR)2 - 0.797σWR2 and check whether it falls below 0 or not (btw, nice slides Helmut). Now, my question is whether this approach using the 95% upper limit can also be rephrased (equivalently) in an "easier" way, that is, in terms of 90% CI must fall within exp(± k*σWR) (using just a different k). On these slides from the FDA it seems that it is the same as scaling the acceptance range using k=0.893. Is it really equivalent?
Thanks,
Ben
Edit: Category changed. [Helmut]
Complete thread:
- Replicate Design: Scaling FDABen 2012-10-23 11:32 [RSABE / ABEL]
- Maybe – but why? Helmut 2012-10-23 15:35
- Maybe – but why? Ben 2012-10-23 16:03
- Got it. Helmut 2012-10-23 16:23
- FDA Mixed up d_labes 2012-10-23 16:23
- FDA Mixed up Helmut 2012-10-23 16:34
- Maybe – but why? Ben 2012-10-27 17:04
- Maybe – but why? Helmut 2012-10-27 17:57
- Maybe – but why? Ben 2012-10-28 13:57
- Potvin (and beyond?) Helmut 2012-10-28 15:59
- Potvin (and beyond?) Ben 2012-11-01 10:17
- Potvin (and beyond?) Helmut 2012-10-28 15:59
- Maybe – but why? Ben 2012-10-28 13:57
- Maybe – but why? Helmut 2012-10-27 17:57
- Maybe – but why? Ben 2012-10-23 16:03
- Maybe – but why? Helmut 2012-10-23 15:35