A comparative appraisal of two equivalence tests for multiple standardized effects

Gwowen Shieh*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations


Equivalence testing is recommended as a better alternative to the traditional difference-based methods for demonstrating the comparability of two or more treatment effects. Although equivalent tests of two groups are widely discussed, the natural extensions for assessing equivalence between several groups have not been well examined. This article provides a detailed and schematic comparison of the ANOVA F and the studentized range tests for evaluating the comparability of several standardized effects. Power and sample size appraisals of the two grossly distinct approaches are conducted in terms of a constraint on the range of the standardized means when the standard deviation of the standardized means is fixed. Although neither method is uniformly more powerful, the studentized range test has a clear advantage in sample size requirements necessary to achieve a given power when the underlying effect configurations are close to the priori minimum difference for determining equivalence. For actual application of equivalence tests and advance planning of equivalence studies, both SAS and R computer codes are available as supplementary files to implement the calculations of critical values, p-values, power levels, and sample sizes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)110-117
Number of pages8
JournalComputer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
StatePublished - 1 Apr 2016


  • Effect size
  • Power
  • Sample size
  • Standardized mean difference

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A comparative appraisal of two equivalence tests for multiple standardized effects'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this