“Forced BE” 101 [Power / Sample Size]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2017-12-27 13:23 (2308 d 23:11 ago) – Posting: # 18097
Views: 33,664

❝ what about regulatory queries on "unintentional forced Bioequivalence"


What do you mean by unintentional?
Again: Stop estimating post hoc power! Either the study demonstrated BE or not.*
Going back to my example (study planned for 90% power): The chance to obtain a post hoc power of ≥95% is ~35%. Now what?
It only means thatHowever, the patient’s risk (α = probability of the Type I Error) is independent from the producer’s risk (β = probability of the Type II Error). The latter might be of concern for the IEC in study planning (see Yura’s example) whereas only the former is of regulatory concern – and not affected by power.

I still think that you calculations are wrong. Therefore, you are facing high values more often. Would you mind giving us the data ElMaestro and I asked for?

—
Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

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

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,990 posts in 4,826 threads, 1,665 registered users;
53 visitors (0 registered, 53 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: 13:35 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

If you don’t like something change it;
if you can’t change it, change the way you think about it.    Mary Engelbreit

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