jag009
★★★

NJ,
2013-05-03 18:45
(4795 d 20:53 ago)

Posting: # 10537
Views: 10,368
 

 Reverse Engineering → Back calculate the intra CV [Power / Sample Size]

Hi Helmut!

How does one back calculate the intrasubject CV (and MSE?) from the 90% confidence interval obtained for a three way partial replicate study? Can it be done using the same suggestion that you presented in your previous slides?

Thanks
John


Edit: Started a new thread & changed category. [Helmut]
Helmut
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2013-05-03 19:09
(4795 d 20:29 ago)

@ jag009
Posting: # 10538
Views: 8,639
 

 Why not?

Hi John!

❝ How does one back calculate the intrasubject CV (and MSE?) from the 90% confidence interval obtained for a three way partial replicate study? Can it be done using the same suggestion that you presented in your previous slides?


Essentially yes. You have to get the degrees of freedom right. See Detlew’s post. For your log AUCt data and my CI (ignoring the fact that you had 16, 17, and 18 subjects in the three sequences) I got:

require(PowerTOST)
CVfromCI(lower=0.874898, upper=1.02586, n=51, design="2x3x3", alpha=0.05)
[1] 0.2850511

…or better?*

require(PowerTOST)
CVfromCI(lower=0.874898, upper=1.02586, n=51, design="2x3x3", alpha=0.05, robust=TRUE)
[1] 0.2820788

But: According to this discussion I duno whether the CI is correct. :confused:

Maybe it’s better to go with the linearized CI from the RSABE-code instead (no mixed-effects limbo). With the 90% CI of 0.874723 – 1.02766 I got:

require(PowerTOST)
CVfromCI(lower=0.874723, upper=1.02766, n=51, design="2x3x3", alpha=0.05)
[1] 0.2886897




P.S.: Any news from Donald Schuirmann? ;-)

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
jag009
★★★

NJ,
2013-05-09 22:12
(4789 d 17:26 ago)

@ Helmut
Posting: # 10563
Views: 8,609
 

 Why not?

Hi Helmut,

❝ Essentially yes. You have to get the degrees of freedom right. See Detlew’s post.


Question (obvious answer I am sure). The degrees of freedom for a 3-period 3-sequence 2-treatment partial replicate should be similar to that of a 3-period 3-sequence 3-treatment crossover right?

❝ P.S.: Any news from Donald Schuirmann? ;-)


Waiting...

Thx
John
d_labes
★★★

Berlin, Germany,
2013-05-10 10:12
(4789 d 05:26 ago)

@ jag009
Posting: # 10564
Views: 9,022
 

 degrees of freedom

Dear John,

❝ Question (obvious answer I am sure). The degrees of freedom for a 3-period 3-sequence 2-treatment partial replicate should be similar to that of a 3-period 3-sequence 3-treatment crossover right?


Define similar :-D.

If you need the exact ones:
Have a look at known.designs():
    no   design    df df2 steps  bk bknif       bkni                name   
     0 parallel   n-2 n-2     2 4.0   1/1 1.00000000         2 parallel groups
...
4    2      3x3 2*n-4 n-3     3 2.0   2/9 0.22222222             3x3 crossover
5    3    3x6x3 2*n-4 n-6     6 2.0  1/18 0.05555556           3x6x3 crossover
...
10   9    2x3x3 2*n-3 n-3     3 1.5   1/6 0.16666667 partial replicate (2x3x3)
...


df are the usual degrees of freedom if you use Proc GLM or equivalent.
df2 are the so-called robust degrees of freedom obtained if you analyze via appropriate intra-subject contrasts for T-R averaged over sequence groups.

Regards,

Detlew
BEQool
★    

2025-07-04 09:20
(351 d 06:18 ago)

@ d_labes
Posting: # 24406
Views: 3,346
 

 degrees of freedom of partial replicate 2x3x3

❝ Have a look at known.designs():

    no   design    df df2 steps  bk bknif       bkni                name   

     0 parallel   n-2 n-2     2 4.0   1/1 1.00000000         2 parallel groups

...

4    2      3x3 2*n-4 n-3     3 2.0   2/9 0.22222222             3x3 crossover

5    3    3x6x3 2*n-4 n-6     6 2.0  1/18 0.05555556           3x6x3 crossover

...

10   9    2x3x3 2*n-3 n-3     3 1.5   1/6 0.16666667 partial replicate (2x3x3)

...


❝ df are the usual degrees of freedom if you use Proc GLM or equivalent.


Hello all,

firstly, it is good to have BEBAC forum up and running again :ok:

I have a question regarding df in partial replicate 2x3x3 design. 44 subjects were included in the PK/STAT analysis - 43 of them had data for all periods while 1 subject had data only for 2 periods (the missing period was with reference treatment B so the subject had data for both treatment A and treatment B). Both in SAS and Phoenix WNL the df of the design (Error) is 84. Why is this so? According to the formula 2*n-3 with 44 subjects included in the analysis, the df should be 2*44-3= 85. Or is this discrepancy (84 vs 85 df) a conseqeunce of one missing period for one subject (although the subject has data for both A and B and is included in the analysis)?

Best regards
BEQool
ElMaestro
★★★

Denmark,
2025-07-11 23:42
(343 d 15:56 ago)

@ BEQool
Posting: # 24413
Views: 3,103
 

 degrees of freedom of partial replicate 2x3x3

Hi BEQool

❝ I have a question regarding df in partial replicate 2x3x3 design. 44 subjects were included in the PK/STAT analysis - 43 of them had data for all periods while 1 subject had data only for 2 periods (the missing period was with reference treatment B so the subject had data for both treatment A and treatment B). Both in SAS and Phoenix WNL the df of the design (Error) is 84. Why is this so? According to the formula 2*n-3 with 44 subjects included in the analysis, the df should be 2*44-3= 85. Or is this discrepancy (84 vs 85 df) a conseqeunce of one missing period for one subject (although the subject has data for both A and B and is included in the analysis)?


The residual df's are really just the number of observations minus the number of constants (=model effects) you try to estimate via your stats model.
In your example, you lost one observation but you are actually estimating the same number of constants or model effects. Therefore there will be one less in the residual DF than in the ideal case, cf 2n-3 or something along such lines.
To say it differently: Your model matrix has the same number of columns, but one less row.

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro
BEQool
★    

2025-07-14 11:59
(341 d 03:39 ago)

@ ElMaestro
Posting: # 24414
Views: 3,070
 

 degrees of freedom of partial replicate 2x3x3

Hello ElMaestro,
thank you for the answer, it is much clearer now!

Best regards
BEQool
UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,570 registered users;
140 visitors (0 registered, 140 guests [including 24 identified bots]).
Forum time: 15:38 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

I have finally come to the konklusion
that a good reliable set ov bowels
iz worth more to a man
than enny quantity of brains.    Josh Billings

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