Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Main page Policy/Terms of Use Abbreviations Latest Posts

 Log-in |  Register |  Search

Back to the forum  Query: 2017-06-24 22:55 CEST (UTC+2h)

Bear vs. Phoenix & SAS [R for BE/BA]

posted by Helmut Homepage - Vienna, Austria, 2015-04-20 17:34  - Posting: # 14718
Views: 7,839

Dear all,

I closed this thread. Let’s continue over here. I would say that nowadays few people perform a replicated study without having reference-scaling in mind. What would we need in bear?
We have shown in the past that we get the same results for EMA’s data sets I & II (also when we make #II unbalanced) in PHX and SAS (THX to Shuanghe and Jean-Michel!). I would say, that’s the target.

PS: @ElMaestro. Remember that one of the referees of our reference dataset-MS wanted to discuss the statistical model and we refused? Until somebody shows that what regulators want right now is crap (which will happen – at least partly) we should get the same results independent from the software used. I would be happy if a noncommercial one is amongst them.

[image]All the best,
Helmut Schütz 

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. ☼
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

Back to the forum Activity
 Mix view
Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum | Admin contact
17,003 Posts in 3,644 Threads, 1,040 registered users;
13 users online (0 registered, 13 guests).

No computer has ever been designed
that is ever aware of what it’s doing;
but most of the time, we aren’t either.    Marvin Minsky

BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz