Optimum allocation of treatments for Welch's test in equivalence assessment

Biometrics

Volumn 53, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 1143-1150

  Dette, Holger ^a   Munk, Axel ^a  

^a RUHR UNIVERSITY BOCHUM   (Germany)

Author keywords

Behrens Fisher problem; Bioequivalence; Clinically relevant differences; Optimal sample sizes; Type II error; Welch's approximate t solution

Indexed keywords

BEHRENS FISHER PROBLEMS; BIOEQUIVALENCE; CLINICALLY RELEVANT DIFFERENCE; OPTIMAL SAMPLE SIZE; OPTIMAL SAMPLES; OPTIMUM ALLOCATION; SAMPLE SIZES; TYPE II ERROR; WELCH APPROXIMATE T-SOLUTION; WELCH TESTS;

ARTICLE; BIOEQUIVALENCE; PROBABILITY; SAMPLE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICS; VARIANCE;

MARTES PENNANTI;

EID: 0030845853     PISSN: 0006341X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/2533572     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Chow, S. C. and Liu, J. P. (1992). Design and Analysis of Bioequivalence Studies. STATISTICS: Textbooks and Monographs. New York: Marcel Dekker.
2. Dannenberg, O., Dette, H., and Munk, A. (1994). An extension of Welch's approximative t-solution to comparative bioequivalence trials. Biometrika 81, 91-101.
3. Dufner, J., Jensen, U., and Schumacher, E. (1992). Statistik mit SAS. Stuttgart: B. G. Teubner Studienbücher Mathematik.
4. FDA. (1992). Draft recommendation on statistical procedures for bioequivalence studies using the standard two treatment crossover design. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Maryland.
5. Hauschke, D., Steinijans, V. W., and Hothorn, L. A. (1996). A note on Welch's approximate solution to bioequivalence assessment. Biometrika 83(1), 236-238.
6. Hodges, J. L. and Lehmann, E. L. (1954). Testing the approximative validity of statistical hypotheses. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 16-17, 261-268.
7. Hsu, J. C., Hwang, G., Liu, H.-K., and Ruberg, S. J. (1994). Confidence intervals associated with tests for bioequivalence. Biometrika 81(1), 103-114.
8. Jennison, C. and Turnbull, B. W. (1993). Sequential equivalence testing and repeated confidence intervals with applications to normal and binary responses. Biometrics 49, 31-43.
9. Lee, A. F. S. (1992). Optimal sample sizes determined by two-sample Welch's t-test. Communications in Statistics - Computations and Simulations 21(3), 689-696.
10. Mandallaz, D. and Mau, J. (1981). Comparison of different methods for decision-making in bioequivalence assessment. Biometrics 37, 213-222.
11. Metzler, C. M. (1974). Bioavailability. A problem in equivalence. Biometrics 30, 309-317.
12. Pfanzagl, J. (1974). On the Behrens-Fisher problem. Biometrika 61, 39-47.
13. Press, W. H., Flannery, B. P., Teukolsky, S. A., and Vetterling, W. T. (1989). Numerical Recipes in Pascal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Rogers, J. L., Howard, K. I., and Vessey, J. T. (1993). Using significance tests to evaluate equivalence between two experimental groups. Psychological Bulletin 113(3), 553-565.
15. Staudte, R. G. and Sheather, S. J. (1990). Robust Estimation and Testing. New York: John Wiley.
16. Victor, N. (1987). Relevant differences and shifted null hypotheses. Methods of Information in Medicine 26, 109-116.
17. Wallenstein, S. and Fisher, A. C. (1977). The analysis of the two-period repeated measurements crossover design with application to clinical trials. Biometrics 33, 261-269.
18. Welch, B. L. (1938). The significance of the difference between means when the population variances are unequal. Biometrika 29, 350-362.
19. Westlake, W. J. (1979). Statistical aspects of comparative bioavailiability trials. Biometrics 35, 273-280.
20. Yeh, K. C. and Kwan, K. C. (1978). A comparsion of numerical integrating algorithms by trape-zoidal, Lagrange and spline approximations. Journal of Pharmacokinetics Biopharmaceutics 6, 79-81.