Last updated on 2026-06-07 20:52:01 CEST.
| Flavor | Version | Tinstall | Tcheck | Ttotal | Status | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-clang | 0.3.0 | 31.14 | 475.48 | 506.62 | OK | |
| r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-gcc | 0.3.0 | 21.07 | 289.60 | 310.67 | ERROR | |
| r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang | 0.3.0 | 65.00 | 772.55 | 837.55 | OK | |
| r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-gcc | 0.3.0 | 59.00 | 756.78 | 815.78 | OK | |
| r-devel-windows-x86_64 | 0.3.0 | 37.00 | 428.00 | 465.00 | OK | |
| r-patched-linux-x86_64 | 0.3.0 | 27.96 | 457.88 | 485.84 | OK | |
| r-release-linux-x86_64 | 0.3.0 | 28.95 | 462.34 | 491.29 | OK | |
| r-release-macos-arm64 | 0.3.0 | 8.00 | 110.00 | 118.00 | OK | |
| r-release-macos-x86_64 | 0.3.0 | 23.00 | 568.00 | 591.00 | OK | |
| r-release-windows-x86_64 | 0.3.0 | 37.00 | 431.00 | 468.00 | OK | |
| r-oldrel-macos-arm64 | 0.3.0 | 8.00 | 105.00 | 113.00 | OK | |
| r-oldrel-macos-x86_64 | 0.3.0 | 22.00 | 422.00 | 444.00 | OK | |
| r-oldrel-windows-x86_64 | 0.3.0 | 47.00 | 604.00 | 651.00 | OK |
Version: 0.3.0
Check: examples
Result: ERROR
Running examples in ‘SimplyAgree-Ex.R’ failed
The error most likely occurred in:
> base::assign(".ptime", proc.time(), pos = "CheckExEnv")
> ### Name: agreement_limit
> ### Title: Limits of Agreement
> ### Aliases: agreement_limit
>
> ### ** Examples
>
> data('reps')
>
> # Simple
> agreement_limit(x = "x", y ="y", data = reps)
MOVER Limits of Agreement (LoA)
95% LoA @ 5% Alpha-Level
Independent Data Points
Bias Bias CI Lower LoA Upper LoA LoA CI
0.4383 [-0.1669, 1.0436] -1.947 2.824 [-3.0117, 3.8884]
SD of Differences = 1.217
>
> # Replicates
> agreement_limit(x = "x", y ="y", data = reps, id = "id", data_type = "rep")
MOVER Limits of Agreement (LoA)
95% LoA @ 5% Alpha-Level
Data with Replicates
Bias Bias CI Lower LoA Upper LoA LoA CI
0.7152 [-1.5287, 2.9591] -2.232 3.662 [-7.5482, 8.9786]
SD of Differences = 1.5036
>
> # Nested
> agreement_limit(x = "x", y ="y", data = reps, id = "id", data_type = "nest")
Cannot use mode = "satterthwaite" because *lmerTest* package is not installed
Error in `select()`:
! Can't select columns that don't exist.
✖ Column `lower.CL` doesn't exist.
Backtrace:
▆
1. ├─SimplyAgree::agreement_limit(...)
2. │ └─SimplyAgree:::calc_loa_nest(...)
3. │ └─... %>% select(avg, bias, SE, df, lower.CL, upper.CL)
4. ├─dplyr::select(., avg, bias, SE, df, lower.CL, upper.CL)
5. ├─dplyr:::select.data.frame(., avg, bias, SE, df, lower.CL, upper.CL)
6. │ └─tidyselect::eval_select(expr(c(...)), data = .data, error_call = error_call)
7. │ └─tidyselect:::eval_select_impl(...)
8. │ ├─tidyselect:::with_subscript_errors(...)
9. │ │ └─base::withCallingHandlers(...)
10. │ └─tidyselect:::vars_select_eval(...)
11. │ └─tidyselect:::walk_data_tree(expr, data_mask, context_mask)
12. │ └─tidyselect:::eval_c(expr, data_mask, context_mask)
13. │ └─tidyselect:::reduce_sels(node, data_mask, context_mask, init = init)
14. │ └─tidyselect:::walk_data_tree(new, data_mask, context_mask)
15. │ └─tidyselect:::as_indices_sel_impl(...)
16. │ └─tidyselect:::as_indices_impl(...)
17. │ └─tidyselect:::chr_as_locations(x, vars, call = call, arg = arg)
18. │ └─vctrs::vec_as_location(...)
19. └─vctrs (local) `<fn>`() at vctrs/R/subscript-loc.R:84:3
20. └─vctrs:::stop_subscript_oob(...)
21. └─vctrs:::stop_subscript(...) at vctrs/R/subscript-loc.R:503:3
22. └─rlang::abort(...) at vctrs/R/subscript.R:150:3
Execution halted
Flavor: r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-gcc
Version: 0.3.0
Check: tests
Result: ERROR
Running ‘testthat.R’ [124s/143s]
Running the tests in ‘tests/testthat.R’ failed.
Complete output:
> library(testthat)
> library(SimplyAgree)
>
> test_check("SimplyAgree")
Saving _problems/test-agree_nest-26.R
Limit of Agreement = 95%
Binomial proportions test and quantile regression for LoA
agreement lower.ci upper.ci
% within 2.5 0.9444 0.6935 0.9922
Hypothesis Test: don't reject h0
###- Quantile Limits of Agreement (LoA) -###
Estimate Lower CI Upper CI CI Level
Lower LoA -1.12 -1.4705 -0.7695 0.90
Bias 0.04 -0.5362 0.6162 0.95
Upper LoA 2.97 2.1954 3.7446 0.90
Limit of Agreement = 95%
Binomial proportions test and quantile regression for LoA
agreement lower.ci upper.ci
% within 2.5 0.9444 0.6935 0.9922
Hypothesis Test: don't reject h0
###- Quantile Limits of Agreement (LoA) -###
Estimate Lower CI Upper CI CI Level
Lower LoA @ 3.9 -1.52603 -1.9506 -1.10148 0.90
Lower LoA @ 5.24 -0.58334 -0.7497 -0.41701 0.90
Lower LoA @ 7.4 0.93837 0.6407 1.23608 0.90
Bias @ 3.9 -0.73052 -1.3830 -0.07808 0.95
Bias @ 5.24 -0.07238 -0.8096 0.66486 0.95
Bias @ 7.4 0.99000 -0.9752 2.95519 0.95
Upper LoA @ 3.9 0.52353 -1.9981 3.04516 0.90
Upper LoA @ 5.24 2.27008 1.6152 2.92494 0.90
Upper LoA @ 7.4 5.08940 1.8002 8.37859 0.90
MOVER Limits of Agreement (LoA)
95% LoA @ 2.5% Alpha-Level
Data with Replicates
Average of Both Methods Bias Bias CI Lower LoA Upper LoA
3.905 -0.3111 [-8.681, 8.0587] -3.341 2.719
5.382 0.6522 [-3.8839, 5.1882] -2.378 3.682
7.395 1.9651 [-7.7328, 11.6631] -1.065 4.995
LoA CI
[-11.1274, 10.5051]
[-10.1641, 11.4684]
[-8.8511, 12.7814]
SD of Differences = 1.546
Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement (LoA) of the Ratio (x/y)
95% LoA @ 2.5% Alpha-Level
Log-transformed Data with Replicates
Bias Bias CI Lower LoA Upper LoA LoA CI
1.119 [0.6373, 1.9636] 0.639 1.958 [0.3961, 3.1593]
Coefficient of Variation (%) = 33.0697
MOVER Limits of Agreement (LoA) of the Ratio (x/y)
95% LoA @ 2.5% Alpha-Level
Log-transformed Data with Replicates
Bias Bias CI Lower LoA Upper LoA LoA CI
1.119 [0.6373, 1.9636] 0.639 1.958 [0.1511, 8.2835]
Coefficient of Variation (%) = 33.0697
MOVER Limits of Agreement (LoA)
95% LoA @ 2.5% Alpha-Level
Data with Replicates
Bias Bias CI Lower LoA Upper LoA LoA CI
0.7152 [-2.2296, 3.66] -2.232 3.662 [-9.7686, 11.199]
SD of Differences = 1.5036
Limit of Agreement = 95%
Replicate Data Points (true value does not vary)
note: hypothesis test likely bogus with proportional bias.
Hypothesis Test: don't reject h0
###- Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement (LoA) -###
Estimate Lower CI Upper CI CI Level
Bias 0.7046 -0.6846 2.0938 0.95
Lower LoA -2.2412 -9.7421 -0.4977 0.95
Upper LoA 3.6504 1.9069 11.1513 0.95
LoA at average of both measures. Please check plot.
Limit of Agreement = 95%
Replicate Data Points (true value does not vary)
Hypothesis Test: No Hypothesis Test
###- Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement (LoA) -###
Estimate Lower CI Upper CI CI Level
Bias 0.7152 -0.6667 2.0971 0.95
Lower LoA -2.2317 -9.7686 -0.4779 0.95
Upper LoA 3.6622 1.9084 11.1990 0.95
Limit of Agreement = 95%
Replicate Data Points (true value does not vary)
Hypothesis Test: don't reject h0
###- Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement (LoA) -###
Estimate Lower CI Upper CI CI Level
Bias 0.7152 -0.6667 2.0971 0.95
Lower LoA -2.2317 -7.5482 -0.7295 0.90
Upper LoA 3.6622 2.1599 8.9786 0.90
Limit of Agreement = 80%
Replicate Data Points (true value does not vary)
Hypothesis Test: reject h0
###- Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement (LoA) -###
Estimate Lower CI Upper CI CI Level
Bias 0.7152 -0.09588 1.5263 0.75
Lower LoA -1.2117 -2.31316 -0.6769 0.50
Upper LoA 2.6421 2.10732 3.7436 0.50
Limit of Agreement = 80%
Replicate Data Points (true value does not vary)
Hypothesis Test: reject h0
###- Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement (LoA) -###
Estimate Lower CI Upper CI CI Level
Bias 0.7152 -0.09588 1.5263 0.75
Lower LoA -1.2117 -2.31316 -0.6769 0.50
Upper LoA 2.6421 2.10732 3.7436 0.50
[1] 79.0000000 0.8022956
Weighted Deming Regression with 95% C.I.
Call:
dem_reg(formula = y ~ x, data = df1, weighted = TRUE, error.ratio = 4,
conf.level = 0.95)
Coefficients:
(Intercept) x
-0.3251 1.0309
Weighted Deming Regression with 95% C.I.
Call:
dem_reg(formula = y ~ x + id, data = reps, id = "id", weighted = TRUE,
conf.level = 0.95)
Coefficients:
(Intercept) x
3.4162 0.2808
Searching for N to achieve 70% power...
Testing N = 30... CI: 99.0%, Joint: 100.0%
Target power achieved!
Searching for N to achieve 99% power...
Testing N = 20... CI: 7.0%, Joint: 12.0%
Testing N = 30... CI: 8.0%, Joint: 8.0%
Searching for N to achieve 60% power...
Testing N = 25... CI: 100.0%, Joint: 100.0%
Target power achieved!
Searching for N to achieve 60% power...
Testing N = 25... CI: 100.0%, Joint: 100.0%
Target power achieved!
95% Limits of Agreement with Parametric Bootstrap 95% Confidence Intervals
Average Condition Measures Estimate Lower CI Upper CI
1 36.67 23C/5.5 Bias 0.3206 0.179362 0.62307
2 36.67 23C/5.5 Lower LoA -0.1665 -0.524443 0.33045
3 36.67 23C/5.5 Upper LoA 0.8078 0.581119 1.05272
4 36.67 33C/5.5 Bias 0.2780 0.134837 0.42243
5 36.67 33C/5.5 Lower LoA -0.1214 -0.427868 0.11787
6 36.67 33C/5.5 Upper LoA 0.6775 0.659564 0.85497
7 36.67 33C/7.5 Bias 0.2812 0.044819 0.56938
8 36.67 33C/7.5 Lower LoA -0.1882 -0.255122 0.20856
9 36.67 33C/7.5 Upper LoA 0.7505 0.312272 1.12957
10 36.93 23C/5.5 Bias 0.2762 0.182737 0.47856
11 36.93 23C/5.5 Lower LoA -0.2109 -0.553161 0.18973
12 36.93 23C/5.5 Upper LoA 0.7634 0.503896 0.99562
13 36.93 33C/5.5 Bias 0.2336 0.133121 0.42297
14 36.93 33C/5.5 Lower LoA -0.1658 -0.420852 0.09898
15 36.93 33C/5.5 Upper LoA 0.6331 0.546052 0.84975
16 36.93 33C/7.5 Bias 0.2368 0.126981 0.47739
17 36.93 33C/7.5 Lower LoA -0.2326 -0.281824 0.12953
18 36.93 33C/7.5 Upper LoA 0.7061 0.404113 1.00616
19 37.29 23C/5.5 Bias 0.2147 0.045646 0.45151
20 37.29 23C/5.5 Lower LoA -0.2724 -0.592925 0.09455
21 37.29 23C/5.5 Upper LoA 0.7019 0.338404 0.95560
22 37.29 33C/5.5 Bias 0.1721 0.002820 0.53180
23 37.29 33C/5.5 Lower LoA -0.2273 -0.429871 0.11674
24 37.29 33C/5.5 Upper LoA 0.5715 0.340632 0.96351
25 37.29 33C/7.5 Bias 0.1752 0.004807 0.36982
26 37.29 33C/7.5 Lower LoA -0.2941 -0.450123 0.05227
27 37.29 33C/7.5 Upper LoA 0.6446 0.428586 0.85544
95% Limits of Agreement with Bootstrap 95% Confidence Intervals
estimate lower.ci upper.ci
Mean Bias 0.2510000 0.1570124 0.3128609
Lower LoA -0.1887407 -0.2883997 -0.1073991
Upper LoA 0.6907407 0.5929600 0.8167491
Coefficient of Variation (%): 19.1
Standard Error of Measurement (SEM): 1.01
Standard Error of the Estimate (SEE): 1.22
Standard Error of Prediction (SEP): 1.9
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients with 95 % C.I.
Model Measures Type ICC Lower CI Upper CI
1 one-way random Agreement ICC1 0.1657 -0.09672 0.6434
2 two-way random Agreement ICC2 0.2898 0.04290 0.6911
3 two-way fixed Consistency ICC3 0.7148 0.41183 0.9258
4 one-way random Avg. Agreement ICC1k 0.4428 -0.54504 0.8783
5 two-way random Avg. Agreement ICC2k 0.6201 0.15204 0.8995
6 two-way fixed Avg. Consistency ICC3k 0.9093 0.73690 0.9804
Coefficient of Variation (%): 19.1
Standard Error of Measurement (SEM): 1.01
Standard Error of the Estimate (SEE): 1.22
Standard Error of Prediction (SEP): 1.9
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients with 95 % C.I.
Model Measures Type ICC Lower CI Upper CI
1 one-way random Agreement ICC1 0.1657 -0.09672 0.6434
2 two-way random Agreement ICC2 0.2898 0.04290 0.6911
3 two-way fixed Consistency ICC3 0.7148 0.41184 0.9258
4 one-way random Avg. Agreement ICC1k 0.4428 -0.54504 0.8783
5 two-way random Avg. Agreement ICC2k 0.6201 0.15204 0.8995
6 two-way fixed Avg. Consistency ICC3k 0.9093 0.73690 0.9804
Coefficient of Variation (%): 19.1 95% C.I. [10.7, 25]
Standard Error of Measurement (SEM): 1.01 95% C.I. [0.566, 1.32]
Standard Error of the Estimate (SEE): 1.22 95% C.I. [0.65, 1.98]
Standard Error of Prediction (SEP): 1.9 95% C.I. [0.967, 3.43]
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients
Model Measures Type ICC Lower CI Upper CI
1 one-way random Agreement ICC1 0.1657 -0.09672 0.6434
2 two-way random Agreement ICC2 0.2898 0.04290 0.6911
3 two-way fixed Consistency ICC3 0.7148 0.41184 0.9258
4 one-way random Avg. Agreement ICC1k 0.4428 -0.54504 0.8783
5 two-way random Avg. Agreement ICC2k 0.6201 0.15204 0.8995
6 two-way fixed Avg. Consistency ICC3k 0.9093 0.73690 0.9804
Coefficient of Variation (%): 19.1
Standard Error of Measurement (SEM): 1.01
Standard Error of the Estimate (SEE): 1.22
Standard Error of Prediction (SEP): 1.9
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients with 95 % C.I.
Model Measures Type ICC Lower CI Upper CI
1 one-way random Agreement ICC1 0.1657 -0.09672 0.6434
2 two-way random Agreement ICC2 0.2898 0.04290 0.6911
3 two-way fixed Consistency ICC3 0.7148 0.41184 0.9258
4 one-way random Avg. Agreement ICC1k 0.4428 -0.54504 0.8783
5 two-way random Avg. Agreement ICC2k 0.6201 0.15204 0.8995
6 two-way fixed Avg. Consistency ICC3k 0.9093 0.73690 0.9804
Deming Regression with 95% C.I.
Call:
dem_reg(formula = Y ~ X, data = ncss_deming1, error.ratio = 4,
weighted = FALSE, conf.level = 0.95)
Coefficients:
(Intercept) X
-0.08974 1.00119
Deming Regression with 95% C.I.
Call:
dem_reg(formula = Y ~ X, data = ncss_deming1, error.ratio = 4,
weighted = FALSE, conf.level = 0.95)
Coefficients:
coef bias se df lower.ci upper.ci t p.value
Intercept -0.08974 -0.044938 1.7220 8 -4.0607 3.881 -0.05212 0.9597
Slope 1.00119 0.003529 0.1872 8 0.5696 1.433 0.00638 0.9951
8 degrees of freedom
Error variance ratio (lambda): 4.0000
Passing-Bablok (scissors) with 95% C.I.
Call:
pb_reg(formula = Method2 ~ Method1, data = ncss_pb1)
Coefficients:
term coef se lower.ci upper.ci df null_value reject_h0
1 Intercept -0.15 0.377175 -0.8457 0.6328 28 0 FALSE
2 Method1 1.00 0.006178 0.9880 1.0122 28 1 FALSE
28 degrees of freedom
Error variance ratio (lambda): 1.0000
Deming Regression with 95% C.I.
Call:
dem_reg(formula = Y ~ X, data = ncss_deming1, error.ratio = 4,
weighted = FALSE, conf.level = 0.95)
Coefficients:
coef bias se df lower.ci upper.ci t p.value
Intercept -0.08974 -0.044938 1.7220 8 -4.0607 3.881 -0.05212 0.9597
Slope 1.00119 0.003529 0.1872 8 0.5696 1.433 0.00638 0.9951
8 degrees of freedom
Error variance ratio (lambda): 4.0000
Agreement between Measures (Difference: x-y)
95% Prediction Interval with 95% Tolerance Limits
Bias Bias CI Prediction Interval Tolerance Limits
0.1908 [0.1462, 0.2355] [-0.1578, 0.5395] [-0.2123, 0.594]
Agreement between Measures (Difference: x-y)
95% Prediction Interval with 95% Tolerance Limits
Average of Both Methods Bias Bias CI Prediction Interval
36.38 0.2333 [0.1319, 0.3347] [-0.1275, 0.5941]
36.83 0.1901 [0.1453, 0.2348] [-0.1591, 0.5392]
37.23 0.1512 [0.0552, 0.2472] [-0.2081, 0.5105]
Tolerance Limits
[-0.1844, 0.651]
[-0.2141, 0.5943]
[-0.2648, 0.5672]
Agreement between Measures (Difference: x-y)
95% Prediction Interval with 95% Tolerance Limits
Bias Bias CI Prediction Interval Tolerance Limits
0.1908 [0.1191, 0.2625] [-0.2098, 0.5915] [-0.3803, 0.762]
Agreement between Measures (Difference: x-y)
95% Prediction Interval with 95% Tolerance Limits
Bias Bias CI Prediction Interval Tolerance Limits
0.1907 [0.1284, 0.253] [-0.1828, 0.5642] [-0.2986, 0.68]
Agreement between Measures (Difference: x-y)
95% Prediction Interval with 95% Tolerance Limits
Bias Bias CI Prediction Interval Tolerance Limits
0.1907 [0.1284, 0.253] [-0.1828, 0.5642] [-0.2986, 0.6801]
Agreement between Measures (Difference: x-y)
95% Prediction Interval with 95% Tolerance Limits
Condition Bias Bias CI Prediction Interval Tolerance Limits
AM 0.1581 [0.0786, 0.2377] [-0.2164, 0.5327] [-0.3403, 0.6565]
PM 0.2233 [0.1438, 0.3028] [-0.1513, 0.5979] [-0.2751, 0.7217]
Agreement between Measures (Difference: x-y)
95% Prediction Interval with 95% Tolerance Limits
Condition Bias Bias CI Prediction Interval Tolerance Limits
AM 0.1537 [0.0595, 0.2478] [-0.2919, 0.5993] [-0.3513, 0.642]
PM 0.2280 [0.1342, 0.3218] [-0.3162, 0.7722] [-0.3557, 0.8522]
Agreement between Measures (Ratio: x/y)
95% Prediction Interval with 95% Tolerance Limits
Average of Both Methods Bias Bias CI Prediction Interval
36.38 1.005 [1.0014, 1.0082] [0.9943, 1.0153]
36.83 1.005 [1.003, 1.0074] [0.9935, 1.0171]
37.23 1.006 [1.0024, 1.0089] [0.9952, 1.0161]
Tolerance Limits
[0.9921, 1.0176]
[0.9877, 1.0231]
[0.9928, 1.0185]
Sympercent Difference between Methods (s%)
95% Prediction Interval with 95% Tolerance Limits
Average of Both Methods Bias Bias CI Prediction Interval
36.38 0.4745 [0.1362, 0.8128] [-0.5679, 1.5169]
36.83 0.5194 [0.3011, 0.7377] [-0.654, 1.6928]
37.23 0.5598 [0.2359, 0.8837] [-0.4811, 1.6007]
Tolerance Limits
[-0.7957, 1.7447]
[-1.2419, 2.2807]
[-0.7182, 1.8378]
Agreement between Measures (Ratio: x/y)
95% Prediction Interval with 95% Tolerance Limits
Condition Average of Both Methods Bias Bias CI Prediction Interval
AM 36.38 1.007 [1.0035, 1.0096] [0.9955, 1.0176]
PM 36.38 1.010 [1.0062, 1.0139] [0.9989, 1.0213]
AM 36.83 1.003 [1.001, 1.0057] [0.992, 1.0149]
PM 36.83 1.007 [1.0047, 1.0091] [0.9927, 1.0213]
AM 37.23 1.001 [0.9967, 1.0045] [0.9895, 1.0117]
PM 37.23 1.004 [1.0015, 1.0066] [0.9929, 1.0153]
Tolerance Limits
[0.9931, 1.0201]
[0.9969, 1.0234]
[0.9882, 1.0188]
[0.9836, 1.0308]
[0.9876, 1.0137]
[0.9897, 1.0186]
Agreement between Measures (Ratio: x/y)
95% Prediction Interval with 95% Tolerance Limits
Condition Average of Both Methods Bias Bias CI Prediction Interval
AM 36.38 1.007 [1.0035, 1.0096] [0.9955, 1.0176]
PM 36.38 1.010 [1.0062, 1.0139] [0.9989, 1.0213]
AM 36.83 1.003 [1.001, 1.0057] [0.992, 1.0149]
PM 36.83 1.007 [1.0047, 1.0091] [0.9927, 1.0213]
AM 37.23 1.001 [0.9967, 1.0045] [0.9895, 1.0117]
PM 37.23 1.004 [1.0015, 1.0066] [0.9929, 1.0153]
Tolerance Limits
[0.9929, 1.0206]
[0.9958, 1.0253]
[0.9897, 1.0174]
[0.9917, 1.0218]
[0.9854, 1.0156]
[0.9899, 1.018]
Agreement between Measures (Ratio: x/y)
95% Prediction Interval with 95% Tolerance Limits
Average of Both Methods Bias Bias CI Prediction Interval
36.38 1.005 [1.0014, 1.0082] [0.9943, 1.0153]
36.83 1.005 [1.003, 1.0074] [0.9935, 1.0171]
37.23 1.006 [1.0024, 1.0089] [0.9952, 1.0161]
Tolerance Limits
[0.9903, 1.0181]
[0.9918, 1.0193]
[0.9928, 1.02]
Limit of Agreement = 95%
###- Shieh Results -###
Exact 90% C.I. [-2.6418, 3.5184]
Hypothesis Test: don't reject h0
###- Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement (LoA) -###
Estimate Lower CI Upper CI CI Level
Bias 0.4383 -0.1669 1.044 0.95
Lower LoA -1.9470 -2.8162 -1.078 0.90
Upper LoA 2.8237 1.9545 3.693 0.90
###- Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC) -###
CCC: 0.4791, 95% C.I. [0.1276, 0.7237]
[ FAIL 1 | WARN 2 | SKIP 6 | PASS 682 ]
══ Skipped tests (6) ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
• On CRAN (6): 'test-deming_power.R:300:3', 'test-deming_power.R:318:3',
'test-deming_power.R:354:3', 'test-deming_power.R:375:3',
'test-deming_power.R:411:3', 'test-deming_power.R:439:3'
══ Failed tests ════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
── Error ('test-agree_nest.R:22:3'): examples from Zou ─────────────────────────
<vctrs_error_subscript_oob/vctrs_error_subscript/rlang_error/error/condition>
Error in `select(., avg, bias, SE, df, lower.CL, upper.CL)`: Can't select columns that don't exist.
✖ Column `lower.CL` doesn't exist.
Backtrace:
▆
1. ├─SimplyAgree::agreement_limit(...) at test-agree_nest.R:22:3
2. │ └─SimplyAgree:::calc_loa_nest(...)
3. │ └─... %>% select(avg, bias, SE, df, lower.CL, upper.CL)
4. ├─dplyr::select(., avg, bias, SE, df, lower.CL, upper.CL)
5. ├─dplyr:::select.data.frame(., avg, bias, SE, df, lower.CL, upper.CL)
6. │ └─tidyselect::eval_select(expr(c(...)), data = .data, error_call = error_call)
7. │ └─tidyselect:::eval_select_impl(...)
8. │ ├─tidyselect:::with_subscript_errors(...)
9. │ │ └─base::withCallingHandlers(...)
10. │ └─tidyselect:::vars_select_eval(...)
11. │ └─tidyselect:::walk_data_tree(expr, data_mask, context_mask)
12. │ └─tidyselect:::eval_c(expr, data_mask, context_mask)
13. │ └─tidyselect:::reduce_sels(node, data_mask, context_mask, init = init)
14. │ └─tidyselect:::walk_data_tree(new, data_mask, context_mask)
15. │ └─tidyselect:::as_indices_sel_impl(...)
16. │ └─tidyselect:::as_indices_impl(...)
17. │ └─tidyselect:::chr_as_locations(x, vars, call = call, arg = arg)
18. │ └─vctrs::vec_as_location(...)
19. └─vctrs (local) `<fn>`() at vctrs/R/subscript-loc.R:84:3
20. └─vctrs:::stop_subscript_oob(...)
21. └─vctrs:::stop_subscript(...) at vctrs/R/subscript-loc.R:503:3
22. └─rlang::abort(...) at vctrs/R/subscript.R:150:3
[ FAIL 1 | WARN 2 | SKIP 6 | PASS 682 ]
Error:
! Test failures.
Execution halted
Flavor: r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-gcc
Version: 0.3.0
Check: re-building of vignette outputs
Result: ERROR
Error(s) in re-building vignettes:
...
--- re-building ‘Deming.Rmd’ using rmarkdown
[WARNING] Citeproc: citation bablok1988 not found
[WARNING] Citeproc: citation passing1983 not found
[WARNING] Citeproc: citation passing1984 not found
--- finished re-building ‘Deming.Rmd’
--- re-building ‘agree_tests.Rmd’ using rmarkdown
--- finished re-building ‘agree_tests.Rmd’
--- re-building ‘agreement_analysis.Rmd’ using rmarkdown
Quitting from agreement_analysis.Rmd:347-356 [unnamed-chunk-6]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<error/vctrs_error_subscript_oob>
Error in `select()`:
! Can't select columns that don't exist.
✖ Column `lower.CL` doesn't exist.
---
Backtrace:
▆
1. ├─SimplyAgree::agreement_limit(...)
2. │ └─SimplyAgree:::calc_loa_nest(...)
3. │ └─... %>% select(avg, bias, SE, df, lower.CL, upper.CL)
4. ├─dplyr::select(., avg, bias, SE, df, lower.CL, upper.CL)
5. └─dplyr:::select.data.frame(., avg, bias, SE, df, lower.CL, upper.CL)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Error: processing vignette 'agreement_analysis.Rmd' failed with diagnostics:
Can't select columns that don't exist.
✖ Column `lower.CL` doesn't exist.
--- failed re-building ‘agreement_analysis.Rmd’
--- re-building ‘power_sample_size_vignette.Rmd’ using rmarkdown
--- finished re-building ‘power_sample_size_vignette.Rmd’
--- re-building ‘reanalysis.Rmd’ using rmarkdown
--- finished re-building ‘reanalysis.Rmd’
--- re-building ‘reliability_analysis.Rmd’ using rmarkdown
--- finished re-building ‘reliability_analysis.Rmd’
SUMMARY: processing the following file failed:
‘agreement_analysis.Rmd’
Error: Vignette re-building failed.
Execution halted
Flavor: r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-gcc