RE: nm7 IMP method question

From: Joseph Standing Date: May 13, 2010 technical Source: mail-archive.com
Desr Ethan, It is my understanding that you should do an IMP step with EONLY=1 in order to get an OFV to be used for hypothesis testing after a SAEM step, as the SAEM OFV cannot be used for likelihood ratio tests. I think your problem is that the first IMP step has converged (you asked for CTYPE=3), but in the second IMP step you are not specifying any convergence criteria causing your OFV to wander off (excuse the technical language). Best wishes, Joe Joseph F Standing Department of Pharmacy Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children London WC1N 3JH
Quoted reply history
________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ethan Wu [[email protected]] Sent: 12 May 2010 20:35 To: Sebastian Ueckert; nmusers Subject: Re: [NMusers] nm7 IMP method question Hi Sebastian, sorry just reply now, somehow your email was spamed, I just recovered after seeing other users reply to your email. the reason I had another IMP step was, I remembered at nm7 workship, it was suggested to run another IMP step for SE estimate. The first IMP was done as $EST METHOD=IMP INTERACTION NOABORT NITER=100 CTYPE=3 PRINT=1 SIGL=4 ISAMPLE=300 ________________________________ From: Sebastian Ueckert <[email protected]> To: nmusers <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, May 12, 2010 11:08:09 AM Subject: Re: [NMusers] nm7 IMP method question Dear Ethan. if you use the IMP method to estimate your parameters, you do not have to run a second IMP step. The ESTEP is run for every iteration and if the OFV is stable during the last iterations you can just use that. However the behavior you are describing is strange. It could be related to different settings for both steps. Can you please send the code for both $EST lines? Best regards, Sebastian Sebastian Ueckert, MSc, PhD student ----------------------------------------------- Pharmacometrics Research Group, Department of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University ----------------------------------------------- P.O. Box 591 SE-751 24 Uppsala Sweden ----------------------------------------------- [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ----------------------------------------------- Work: +46-(0)18-471 4437 On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Ethan Wu <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: IACCEPT ******************************************************************************************************************** This message may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender that you have received the message in error before deleting it. Please do not disclose, copy or distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on its contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Thank you for your co-operation. NHSmail is the secure email and directory service available for all NHS staff in England and Scotland NHSmail is approved for exchanging patient data and other sensitive information with NHSmail and GSI recipients NHSmail provides an email address for your career in the NHS and can be accessed anywhere For more information and to find out how you can switch, visit www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/nhsmail ********************************************************************************************************************
May 12, 2010 Ethan Wu nm7 IMP method question
May 12, 2010 Sebastian Ueckert Re: nm7 IMP method question
May 12, 2010 Leonid Gibiansky Re: nm7 IMP method question
May 12, 2010 Xavier Woot de Trixhe Re: nm7 IMP method question
May 13, 2010 Joseph Standing RE: nm7 IMP method question
May 13, 2010 Joseph Standing RE: nm7 IMP method question
May 13, 2010 Robert Bauer RE: nm7 IMP method question
May 14, 2010 Robert Bauer RE: nm7 IMP method question