Interesting! [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by DavidManteigas – Portugal, 2017-03-29 14:28 (2556 d 05:46 ago) – Posting: # 17203
Views: 8,543

Hi ElMaestro,

What I've said is that the p-value for formulation as nothing to do with the statistical conclusion of bioequivalence. For the statistical evaluation of "difference in means", to be compared with the same statistical conclusion of "difference in means" with the 90% confidence interval, the p value must be assessed against the 10% significance level. So, if your 90% Confidence Interval does not contain 1, then the p-value for formulation is also significant at the 10% significance level and may or not be also significant at the 5% significance level.

The model is build the same way whether you are assessing difference in means or bioequivalence. The hypothesis are, however, different. For the hypothesis of "bioequivalence" the alpha level is 5%, and for the hypothesis of "difference in means" the alpha level is 10%. And the p-value only assess the hypothesis of difference in means. I'm sorry if I'm not explaining myself right, I'll let someone smarter try to do a better job :-D

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,957 posts in 4,819 threads, 1,636 registered users;
90 visitors (0 registered, 90 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: 19:15 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Nothing shows a lack of mathematical education more
than an overly precise calculation.    Carl Friedrich Gauß

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5