You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It could be helpful to relax the assumption of exactly balanced cluster size when estimating statistical power using simulation, so I propose that we add a new "distribution" called something like clusterSize that will implement this. As part of data definitions, the user will specify the overall sample size in the formula argument, and will input a dispersion parameter (that will be input into the variance field that is a non-negative number, with 0 meaning exact balance, and larger values implying more variability in the cluster sizes. The only link option argument will be "identity" (the default, so does not need to be specified).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It could be helpful to relax the assumption of exactly balanced cluster size when estimating statistical power using simulation, so I propose that we add a new "distribution" called something like clusterSize that will implement this. As part of data definitions, the user will specify the overall sample size in the formula argument, and will input a dispersion parameter (that will be input into the variance field that is a non-negative number, with 0 meaning exact balance, and larger values implying more variability in the cluster sizes. The only link option argument will be "identity" (the default, so does not need to be specified).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: