Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Main page Policy/Terms of Use Abbreviations Latest Posts

 Log-in |  Register |  Search

Back to the forum  Query: 2017-05-25 03:00 UTC (UTC+2h)

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

posted by Helmut Homepage - Vienna, Austria, 2015-04-20 15:34  - Posting: # 14718
Views: 7,573

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
16,916 Posts in 3,625 Threads, 1,029 registered users;
14 users online (0 registered, 14 guests).

Most scientists today are devoid of ideas, full of fear, intent on
producing some paltry result so that they can add to the flood
of inane papers that now constitutes “scientific progress”
in many areas.    Paul Feyerabend

BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz