Skip to content

Conversation

@LittleBeannie
Copy link
Collaborator

To solve issue #348

Copy link
Collaborator

@jdblischak jdblischak left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested alternative:

      if (all(original_design$bound$bound == "upper")) {
        setnames(planned_bounds, c("analysis", "planned_upper_bound"))
      } else {
        setnames(planned_bounds, c("analysis", "planned_lower_bound", "planned_upper_bound"))
      }

Copy link
Collaborator

@jdblischak jdblischak left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I recommend adding a test with a 1-sided design that follows the new code path that this PR introduces

@LittleBeannie LittleBeannie merged commit ee9d988 into main Oct 15, 2025
9 checks passed
@LittleBeannie LittleBeannie deleted the 348-fix-sim_gs_n-to-allow-updated-design-when-it-is-one-sided-test branch October 15, 2025 17:31
@LittleBeannie LittleBeannie self-assigned this Oct 16, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Fix sim_gs_n to provide updated efficacy bound when it is one-sided test

3 participants